On Jan 27, 2008 10:35 PM, Pekka Enberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I think there's a pretty big chance I'm wrong (or misunderstanding > > something) here, so I'll just ask: > > setup_object() from mm/slub.c is what calls the ctor. Shouldn't this > > be called from slab_alloc() as well? (I'm marking the data > > "uninitialized" there before returning the object.) Otherwise you > > might get back an object that is initialized with the previous owner's > > data. Or is this intentional? > > It's intentional. The caller of kmem_cache_free() is expected to put > the object in such a state that it can be recycled immediately when > kmem_cache_alloc() for that cache is called. You can find the design > rationale for that in Bonwick's original paper on slab: > http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/bonwick94slab.html
Ow. I guess this is the end of the thread, then :-) My fault. Thanks! Vegard -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
