Hi,
On 12/29/05, Jens Axboe <[email protected]> wrote:
> Well you could do that if you wanted, but 500 bytes of dynamic
> allocation is not a big issue. But it could be an optimization on top of
> this patch, indeed. The downside is that you then have to do 2
> allocations for each command, so whether it would be a win or not I
> don't know.
The allocation shouldn't make much difference but for the implicit
memset() smaller size is a win maybe?
Pekka
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
