Re: slab-alignment-rework.patch in -mc

From: Andrew Morton
Date: Wed Apr 21 2004 - 16:45:23 EST

Manfred Spraul <manfred@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> There is one additional point: right now slab uses ints for the bufctls.
> Using short would save two bytes for each object. Initially I had used
> short, but davem objected. IIRC because some archs do not handle short
> effeciently. Should I allow arch overrides for the bufctls? On i386,
> saving two bytes might allow a few additional anon_vma objects in each
> page.

There's one bufctl per object, yes?

Sounds like a worthwhile optimisation.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at