On Sat, Dec 3, 2016 at 5:37 PM, David Miller <da...@davemloft.net> wrote:
> > Sorry, just noticed by visual inspection. I expected the > struct sock part to show up in the same patch as the one > that removed it from tcp_sock and adjusted the users. > > I'll re-review this series, thanks. Yes, I wanted to have after patch 7, the final cache line disposition of struct sock. (Quite critical for future bisections if needed, or performance tests I mentioned) I could have used a 'unsigned long _temp_padding', but just chose the final name for the field. Thanks.
