> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Jan 3, 2011 at 8:48 AM, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu> wrote:
> >> Given the patches being busily submitted by trivial patch submitters to
> >> make use kmem_cache_zalloc(), et. al, I believe we should remove the
> >> unlikely() tests around the (gfp_flags & __GFP_ZERO) tests, such as:
> >>
> >> - if (unlikely((flags & __GFP_ZERO) && objp))
> >> + if ((flags & __GFP_ZERO) && objp)
> >> memset(objp, 0, obj_size(cachep));
> >>
> >> Agreed? If so, I'll send a patch...
>
> On Mon, Jan 3, 2011 at 5:46 AM, Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I support it.
>
> I guess the rationale here is that if you're going to take the hit of
> memset() you can take the hit of unlikely() as well. We're optimizing
> for hot call-sites that allocate a small amount of memory and
> initialize everything themselves. That said, I don't think the
> unlikely() annotation matters much either way and am for removing it
> unless people object to that.
>
> On Mon, Jan 3, 2011 at 5:46 AM, Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Recently Steven tried to gather the information.
> >
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1072767
> > Maybe he might have a number for that.
>
> That would be interesting, sure.
