>> Indeed, would be a better fit. I didn't know about this one, thanks for >> that. It's a shame it can't be used in this context, though. But, at the >> end of the day, we're left with nothing regarding buffer occupancy. So >> I'm wondering if "something" is not better than "nothing" in this case. >> And, for that, we're back to my previous answer on why I agree and >> disagree with what you said about its utility. > > I think we're on the same page, the main problem is I've not seen > anyone use the skbuff_head_cache occupancy as a signal in practice. Indeed. > I'm adding a bunch of people to the CC list, hopefully someone has > an opinion one way or the other. +1, thanks Jakub. > Lore link to the full thread, FWIW: > > https://lore.kernel.org/all/20211206211758.19057-1-justin.iurman@xxxxxxxxx/
