Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 15 Apr 2002 18:30:16 -0700 | From | Mike Fedyk <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] for_each_zone / for_each_pgdat |
| |
On Tue, Apr 16, 2002 at 02:44:58AM +0200, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > On Mon, Apr 15, 2002 at 04:20:58PM -0700, William Lee Irwin III wrote: > > I won't scream too loud, but I think it's pretty much done right as is. > > Regardless if that's the cleaner implementation or not, I don't see much > the point of merging those cleanups in 2.4 right now: it won't make any > functional difference to users and it's only a self contained code > cleanup, while other patches that make a runtime difference aren't > merged yet. >
One set (1 of 3) of you vm patches have already gone into 2.4.19-pre and IMHO, each set should go into a major release seperately (2.4.19/20/21). There are so many more people who use the released versions than the -pre versions of the kernel.
No matter how much someone can go through their own code and say "it's ready" there's always a good chance there is some bug that will trigger under testing. Also, Andrew found a problem with your locking changes when he split up your patch, and at the time you were saying it is ready and there were no bug reports against in...
Now I doubt that there is anything to worry about, we are talking about a stable kernel series here.
Does this patch conflict in any way with your vm patches? If not they should be able to co-exist. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |