A: No. Q: Should I include quotations after my reply? http://daringfireball.net/2007/07/on_top On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 03:25:28PM +0000, Faccini, Bruno wrote: > Hello, > The intent of this patch is not to solve the corruptions for sure, but > only to avoid the concerned MEs/small-MDs LNet structs to be quite > frequently impacted due to their high allocation/free rate. But that's not what the patch description said :( And again, putting them in a separate cache is not going to save much of anything, given that your caches might have been merged together anyway. > This may also possibly help to save cycles due to high usage and > contention when using a generic kmem_cache (when they stay separate > from others, thanks for the precision!). Have you measured this? This isn't applicable for 4.7-rc at this time, _unless_ it fixes a bug, which is why I pushed back on this. If you want your own cache for these variables, fine, I don't care, but that makes it a 4.8-rc1 patch instead. hope that helps explain things better, greg k-h _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
