Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 23 Apr 2007 11:23:30 +0100 | From | Andy Whitcroft <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 3/3] introduce HIGH_ORDER delineating easily reclaimable orders |
| |
Andrew Morton wrote: > On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 01:28:43 -0700 Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote: > >> It would have been better to have patched page_alloc.c independently, then >> to have used HIGH_ORDER in "lumpy: increase pressure at the end of the inactive >> list". > > Actually that doesn't matter, because I plan on lumping all the lumpy patches > together into one lump. > > I was going to duck patches #2 and #3, such was my outrage. But given that > it's all lined up to be a single patch, followup cleanup patches will fit in > OK. Please.
Yes. Its funny how you can get so close to a change that you can no longer see the obvious warts on it.
I am actually travelling today, so it'll be tommorrow now. But I'll roll the cleanups and get them to you. I can also offer you a clean drop in lumpy stack with the HIGH_ORDER change pulled out to the top once you are happy.
-apw
- 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/
| |