diff for duplicates of <561FCD59.1090600@arm.com> diff --git a/a/1.txt b/N1/1.txt index 05c8284..2350d8d 100644 --- a/a/1.txt +++ b/N1/1.txt @@ -4,14 +4,14 @@ On 14/10/15 13:12, Jungseok Lee wrote: >>> On 12/10/15 23:13, Jungseok Lee wrote: >>>> On Oct 13, 2015, at 1:34 AM, James Morse wrote: >>>>> Having two kmem_caches for 16K stacks on a 64K page system may be wasteful ->>>>> (especially for systems with few cpus)? +>>>>> (especially for systems with few cpus)… >>>> >>>> This would be a single concern. To address this issue, I drop the 'static' >>>> keyword in thread_info_cache. Please refer to the below hunk. >>> >>> Its only a problem on systems with 64K pages, which don't have a multiple >>> of 4 cpus. I suspect if you turn on 64K pages, you have many cores with ->>> plenty of memory? +>>> plenty of memory… >> >> Yes, the problem 'two kmem_caches' comes from only 64K page system. >> diff --git a/a/content_digest b/N1/content_digest index 724f8b2..c1f19f5 100644 --- a/a/content_digest +++ b/N1/content_digest @@ -7,10 +7,17 @@ "ref\0561CE454.7080201@arm.com\0" "ref\004D64B22-8EF5-400E-A7F0-1CD0AB48184D@gmail.com\0" "ref\0B6AB90B9-3AA9-413A-B357-137710E89C7C@gmail.com\0" - "From\0james.morse@arm.com (James Morse)\0" - "Subject\0[PATCH v4 2/2] arm64: Expand the stack trace feature to support IRQ stack\0" + "From\0James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>\0" + "Subject\0Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] arm64: Expand the stack trace feature to support IRQ stack\0" "Date\0Thu, 15 Oct 2015 16:59:21 +0100\0" - "To\0linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org\0" + "To\0Jungseok Lee <jungseoklee85@gmail.com>\0" + "Cc\0takahiro.akashi@linaro.org" + catalin.marinas@arm.com + will.deacon@arm.com + linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org + mark.rutland@arm.com + barami97@gmail.com + " linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org\0" "\00:1\0" "b\0" "On 14/10/15 13:12, Jungseok Lee wrote:\n" @@ -19,14 +26,14 @@ ">>> On 12/10/15 23:13, Jungseok Lee wrote:\n" ">>>> On Oct 13, 2015, at 1:34 AM, James Morse wrote:\n" ">>>>> Having two kmem_caches for 16K stacks on a 64K page system may be wasteful\n" - ">>>>> (especially for systems with few cpus)?\n" + ">>>>> (especially for systems with few cpus)\342\200\246\n" ">>>>\n" ">>>> This would be a single concern. To address this issue, I drop the 'static'\n" ">>>> keyword in thread_info_cache. Please refer to the below hunk.\n" ">>>\n" ">>> Its only a problem on systems with 64K pages, which don't have a multiple\n" ">>> of 4 cpus. I suspect if you turn on 64K pages, you have many cores with\n" - ">>> plenty of memory?\n" + ">>> plenty of memory\342\200\246\n" ">>\n" ">> Yes, the problem 'two kmem_caches' comes from only 64K page system.\n" ">>\n" @@ -98,4 +105,4 @@ "\n" James -5559697805c665107238ea58758c19df73836e9beeae23462ac15d2fa0e84158 +f9ebfeaa068e4a12c7dea8d6d3320f01cc7fed61611dd6c6a16fd5024896ed13
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.