Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/9] irda: use sock slab cache

From: Christoph Hellwig <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 08:54:54 +0000

On Thu, Jan 20, 2005 at 01:47:10AM -0200, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> >	I'm just curious about the overhead of adding a specific slab
> >for IrDA sockets. Most users never create any (using IrCOMM), or
> >maximum one (using Obex), so it's not like it will get a lot of use
> >(except here, of course).
> 
> Well, lets start with something that may sound funny: when this series
> of patches is finished the overhead will _decrease_ for most people.
> 
> Why? Today we have in most machines five slab caches of this nature:
> udp_sock, raw_sock, tcp_sock, unix_sock (PF_LOCAL) and the generic,
> sock, that only is used by the protocols that are using 
> kmalloc(pritave_sock) +
> sk_protinfo.

But as Jean sais this type of socket is used very little, as are a few
other probably (raw, pfkey?), so maybe those should just use kmalloc +
kfree instead of their own slab?