From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2008 14:49:18 +0000 From: John Levon Subject: Re: [patch][rfc] fs: shrink struct dentry Message-ID: <20081202144918.GB24222@totally.trollied.org.uk> References: <20081201083343.GC2529@wotan.suse.de> <20081201175113.GA16828@totally.trollied.org.uk> <20081201180455.GJ10790@wotan.suse.de> <20081201193818.GB16828@totally.trollied.org.uk> <20081202070608.GA28080@wotan.suse.de> <20081202130410.GA24222@totally.trollied.org.uk> <20081202134926.GA3235@wotan.suse.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20081202134926.GA3235@wotan.suse.de> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Nick Piggin Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Linux Memory Management List , robert.richter@amd.com, oprofile-list@lists.sf.net List-ID: On Tue, Dec 02, 2008 at 02:49:26PM +0100, Nick Piggin wrote: > > I can't believe I'm having to argue that you need to test your code. So > > I think I'll stop. > > Code was tested. It doesn't affect my normal oprofile usage (it's > utterly within the noise, in case that wasn't obvious to you). Then, heck, why didn't you say so?! I just went and read the whole exchange and this is the first time you actually stated you tested the impact of your patch on oprofile overhead. It's in the noise, so it's fine. regards john -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org