From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from ipmail06.adl2.internode.on.net ([150.101.137.129]:18564 "EHLO ipmail06.adl2.internode.on.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727592AbeLEWvI (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Dec 2018 17:51:08 -0500 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2018 09:51:05 +1100 From: Dave Chinner Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfs: use a dedicated SLAB cache for sector sized buffer data Message-ID: <20181205225104.GW6311@dastard> References: <20181205172023.5061-1-hch@lst.de> <20181205215000.GU6311@dastard> <20181205215651.GA4033@lst.de> <20181205223139.GV6311@dastard> <20181205223346.GA5145@lst.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20181205223346.GA5145@lst.de> Sender: linux-xfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: List-Id: xfs To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, tom.leiming@gmail.com, vkuznets@redhat.com On Wed, Dec 05, 2018 at 11:33:46PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Thu, Dec 06, 2018 at 09:31:39AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > > > > > > That's fine because log recovery is one I/O at a time, and we always > > > free the current buffer before allocating the next one, so we'd waste > > > the memory one way or another. > > > > True. Can you mention this in the commit message so it gets recorded > > with the change and doesn't get lost in the mists of time? > > How about a comment instead of the commit message? Either way I can > document this decision for v2. That's fine by me, too. Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@fromorbit.com