> On 2 Oct 2017, at 19.18, Rakesh Pandit wrote:
>
> On Mon, Oct 02, 2017 at 03:25:10PM +0300, Rakesh Pandit wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 02, 2017 at 02:09:35PM +0200, Javier González wrote:
On 1 Oct 2017, at 15.25, Rakesh Pandit wrote:
While separating read and erase mempools in 22da65a
On Mon, Oct 02, 2017 at 03:25:10PM +0300, Rakesh Pandit wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 02, 2017 at 02:09:35PM +0200, Javier González wrote:
> > > On 1 Oct 2017, at 15.25, Rakesh Pandit wrote:
> > >
> > > While separating read and erase mempools in 22da65a1b pblk_g_rq_cache
> > > was used two times to set a
On Mon, Oct 02, 2017 at 02:09:35PM +0200, Javier González wrote:
> > On 1 Oct 2017, at 15.25, Rakesh Pandit wrote:
> >
> > While separating read and erase mempools in 22da65a1b pblk_g_rq_cache
> > was used two times to set aside memory both for erase and read
> > requests. Because same kmem cach
> On 1 Oct 2017, at 15.25, Rakesh Pandit wrote:
>
> While separating read and erase mempools in 22da65a1b pblk_g_rq_cache
> was used two times to set aside memory both for erase and read
> requests. Because same kmem cache is used repeatedly a single call to
> kmem_cache_destroy wouldn't dealloc
While separating read and erase mempools in 22da65a1b pblk_g_rq_cache
was used two times to set aside memory both for erase and read
requests. Because same kmem cache is used repeatedly a single call to
kmem_cache_destroy wouldn't deallocate everything. Repeatedly doing
loading and unloading of p
5 matches
Mail list logo