> By definition, nothing can be destroying caches at the moment because there
> is no way of doing it. So how does adding a function to do this require
> changes to all users?
>
> And furthermore by definition, with my suggested scheme nobody will
> _need_ to explicitly destroy a cache. So my fix allowed everyone to
> just work with the module unload/reload case with no changes to
> anything outside of SLAB.
True; maybe it's also cleaner. I don't really have a preference one or the
other, even though I will be using my own caches in the ntfs module,
eventually.
-- %DCL-MEM-BAD, bad memory VMS-F-PDGERS, pudding between the ears- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/