Re: [PATCH 6/8] Make the sk_clone() lighter

2007-10-31 Thread Pavel Emelyanov
David Miller wrote: > From: Pavel Emelyanov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2007 16:54:34 +0300 > >> The sk_prot_alloc() already performs all the stuff needed by the >> sk_clone(). Besides, the sk_prot_alloc() requires almost twice >> less arguments than the sk_alloc() does, so call the sk

Re: [PATCH 6/8] Make the sk_clone() lighter

2007-10-31 Thread David Miller
From: Pavel Emelyanov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2007 16:54:34 +0300 > The sk_prot_alloc() already performs all the stuff needed by the > sk_clone(). Besides, the sk_prot_alloc() requires almost twice > less arguments than the sk_alloc() does, so call the sk_prot_alloc() > saving the st

Re: [PATCH 6/8] Make the sk_clone() lighter

2007-10-31 Thread David Miller
From: Pavel Emelyanov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2007 16:54:34 +0300 > The sk_prot_alloc() already performs all the stuff needed by the > sk_clone(). Besides, the sk_prot_alloc() requires almost twice > less arguments than the sk_alloc() does, so call the sk_prot_alloc() > saving the st

[PATCH 6/8] Make the sk_clone() lighter

2007-10-31 Thread Pavel Emelyanov
The sk_prot_alloc() already performs all the stuff needed by the sk_clone(). Besides, the sk_prot_alloc() requires almost twice less arguments than the sk_alloc() does, so call the sk_prot_alloc() saving the stack a bit. Signed-off-by: Pavel Emelyanov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --- diff --git a/net/cor