On Fri, Aug 07, 2020 at 11:49:46AM +0200, Patrick Steinhardt wrote: > Yeah, it's also been my take that OS-level overhead is probably going to > matter more than those access calls, and I argued such back when I > proposed the hook. So I'm perfectly happy to see this caching mechanism > go. > > Should I re-post a v2 with your patch and my test? Sure, that would be fine (to be clear, I'd also be OK with your original patch, too; it was mostly just a curiosity to me). -Peff
