Re: [RFC PATCH v2 6/7] lib/persubnode: Introducing a simple per-subnode APIs

[Waiman Long]

On 07/12/2016 02:57 PM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 02:51:31PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
> > The last 2 RFC patches were created in response to Andi's comment to have
> > coarser granularity than per-cpu. In this particular use case, I don't think
> > global list traversals are frequent enough to really have any noticeable
> > performance impact. So I don't have any benchmark number to support this
> > change. However, it may not be true for other future use cases.
> >
> > These 2 patches were created to gauge if using a per-subnode API for this
> > use case is a good idea or not. I am perfectly happy to keep it as per-cpu
> > and scrap the last 2 RFC patches. My main goal is to make this patchset more
> > acceptable to be moved forward instead of staying in limbo.
> I see.  I don't think it makes sense to add a whole new API for a use
> case which doesn't really need it without any backing data.  It
> probably would be best to revisit this when we're dealing with an
> actually problematic case.
>
> Thanks.

I am fine with that. BTW, do you think patches 1-5 are good enough to be 
merged in a future release or is there further improvement that needs to 
be made?

Thanks,
Longman