Re: [PATCH] audit: Reduce overhead using a coarse clock
From: Paul Moore
Date: Thu Jul 06 2017 - 16:25:56 EST
On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 3:41 PM, Deepa Dinamani <deepa.kernel@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 12:20 PM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 2:11 PM, Mel Gorman <mgorman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx>
> Acked-by: Deepa Dinamani <deepa.kernel@xxxxxxxxx>
> As already Arnd pointed out, your patch should be fine as that is how
> it was before my patch. Since nobody saw any problems before my patch,
> lower granularity should be fine.
Agreed. Mel's patch basically restores the previous behavior while
keeping the 64-bit timestamp size.
Considering where we are at with the merge window, I'm going to merge
this into the audit/next branch and not send this up to Linus during
the current window; while the patch is small, I like to give things
some time in linux-next before sending them up.