[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0803031211100.16049@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2008 12:12:15 -0800 (PST)
From: Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>
To: Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>
cc: Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>,
Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
yanmin_zhang@...ux.intel.com, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [rfc][patch 3/3] use SLAB_ALIGN_SMP
On Mon, 3 Mar 2008, Nick Piggin wrote:
> Yeah, that's what I thought too, when I got confused by these new
> SLUB semantics that you made up. Actually if you look at SLAB,
> it has very precise and rational semantics. SLUB should respect that.
These crappy semantics are SLAB semantics that SLUB must support.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists