Re: [PATCH] audit: Reduce overhead using a coarse clock
On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 3:41 PM, Deepa Dinamani <deepa.kernel(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 12:20 PM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd(a)arndb.de>
wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 2:11 PM, Mel Gorman <mgorman(a)techsingularity.net>
wrote:
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman(a)techsingularity.net>
>
> Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd(a)arndb.de>
Acked-by: Deepa Dinamani <deepa.kernel(a)gmail.com>
As already Arnd pointed out, your patch should be fine as that is how
it was before my patch. Since nobody saw any problems before my patch,
lower granularity should be fine.
Agreed. Mel's patch basically restores the previous behavior while
keeping the 64-bit timestamp size.
Considering where we are at with the merge window, I'm going to merge
this into the audit/next branch and not send this up to Linus during
the current window; while the patch is small, I like to give things
some time in linux-next before sending them up.
--
paul moore
www.paul-moore.com