Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 12 Jul 2016 15:42:33 -0400 | From | Waiman Long <> | Subject | Re: [RFC PATCH v2 6/7] lib/persubnode: Introducing a simple per-subnode APIs |
| |
On 07/12/2016 02:57 PM, Tejun Heo wrote: > Hello, > > On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 02:51:31PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote: >> The last 2 RFC patches were created in response to Andi's comment to have >> coarser granularity than per-cpu. In this particular use case, I don't think >> global list traversals are frequent enough to really have any noticeable >> performance impact. So I don't have any benchmark number to support this >> change. However, it may not be true for other future use cases. >> >> These 2 patches were created to gauge if using a per-subnode API for this >> use case is a good idea or not. I am perfectly happy to keep it as per-cpu >> and scrap the last 2 RFC patches. My main goal is to make this patchset more >> acceptable to be moved forward instead of staying in limbo. > I see. I don't think it makes sense to add a whole new API for a use > case which doesn't really need it without any backing data. It > probably would be best to revisit this when we're dealing with an > actually problematic case. > > Thanks. >
I am fine with that. BTW, do you think patches 1-5 are good enough to be merged in a future release or is there further improvement that needs to be made?
Thanks, Longman
| |