On Wed, 27 Feb 2013, Glauber Costa wrote:
> You can apply this one as-is with Christoph's ACK.
Right.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On 02/27/2013 11:47 AM, Pekka Enberg wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 7:23 PM, Christoph Lameter wrote:
>> On Fri, 22 Feb 2013, Glauber Costa wrote:
>>
>>> On 02/22/2013 09:01 PM, Christoph Lameter wrote:
Argh. This one was the final version:
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/20095
On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 7:23 PM, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Fri, 22 Feb 2013, Glauber Costa wrote:
>
>> On 02/22/2013 09:01 PM, Christoph Lameter wrote:
>> > Argh. This one was the final version:
>> >
>> > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/2009521/
>> >
>>
>> It seems it would work. It is all
Hello, Christoph.
On Sun, Feb 24, 2013 at 12:35:22AM +, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Sat, 23 Feb 2013, JoonSoo Kim wrote:
>
> > With flushing, deactivate_slab() occur and it has some overhead to
> > deactivate objects.
> > If my patch properly fix this situation, it is better to use mine
> >
On Sat, 23 Feb 2013, JoonSoo Kim wrote:
> With flushing, deactivate_slab() occur and it has some overhead to
> deactivate objects.
> If my patch properly fix this situation, it is better to use mine
> which has no overhead.
Well this occurs during boot and its not that performance critical.
--
T
2013/2/23 Christoph Lameter :
> On Fri, 22 Feb 2013, Glauber Costa wrote:
>
>> On 02/22/2013 09:01 PM, Christoph Lameter wrote:
>> > Argh. This one was the final version:
>> >
>> > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/2009521/
>> >
>>
>> It seems it would work. It is all the same to me.
>> Which one
On Fri, 22 Feb 2013, Glauber Costa wrote:
> On 02/22/2013 09:01 PM, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> > Argh. This one was the final version:
> >
> > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/2009521/
> >
>
> It seems it would work. It is all the same to me.
> Which one do you prefer?
Flushing seems to be simp
On 02/22/2013 09:01 PM, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> Argh. This one was the final version:
>
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/2009521/
>
It seems it would work. It is all the same to me.
Which one do you prefer?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
th
Argh. This one was the final version:
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/2009521/
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ
An earlier fix to this is available here:
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/1975301/
and
https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/1/15/55
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kerne
On Fri, 22 Feb 2013, Glauber Costa wrote:
> After we create a boot cache, we may allocate from it until it is bootstraped.
> This will move the page from the partial list to the cpu slab list. If this
> happens, the loop:
Acked-by: Christoph Lameter
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the li
11 matches
Mail list logo
