> On Jun 25, 2015, at 2:50 PM, Marcus Gelderie wrote:
>
> Hey all,
>
> answers in text below...
>
> TLDR: I can remove the QKERSIZE field, as I believe that it does not affect he
> RLIMIT accounting (details [=code] below). Question is: Should it?
>
> Before I provide another patch, I would a
Hey all,
answers in text below...
TLDR: I can remove the QKERSIZE field, as I believe that it does not affect he
RLIMIT accounting (details [=code] below). Question is: Should it?
Before I provide another patch, I would appreciate another round of feedback,
though.
So...
On Thu, Jun 25, 2015
[CC'ing akpm as he handles such changes]
On Thu, 2015-06-25 at 09:23 +0200, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
> On 25 June 2015 at 07:47, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> > On Tue, 2015-06-23 at 00:25 +0200, Marcus Gelderie wrote:
> >> A while back, the message queue implementation in the kernel was
> >
On 25 June 2015 at 07:47, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> On Tue, 2015-06-23 at 00:25 +0200, Marcus Gelderie wrote:
>> A while back, the message queue implementation in the kernel was
>> improved to use btrees to speed up retrieval of messages (commit
>> d6629859b36). The patch introducing the improved k
On Tue, 2015-06-23 at 00:25 +0200, Marcus Gelderie wrote:
> A while back, the message queue implementation in the kernel was
> improved to use btrees to speed up retrieval of messages (commit
> d6629859b36). The patch introducing the improved kernel handling of
> message queues (using btrees) has,
A while back, the message queue implementation in the kernel was
improved to use btrees to speed up retrieval of messages (commit
d6629859b36). The patch introducing the improved kernel handling of
message queues (using btrees) has, as a by-product, changed the
meaning of the QSIZE field in the pse
6 matches
Mail list logo
