Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 25 Oct 2012 10:42:20 -0700 | From | Tejun Heo <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 4/6] cgroups: forbid pre_destroy callback to fail |
| |
Hey, Michal.
On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 04:37:56PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > I am not sure I understand you here. So are you suggesting > s/BUG_ON/WARN_ON_ONCE/ in this patch?
Oh, no, I meant that we can do upto patch 3 of this series and then follow up with proper cgroup core update and then stack further memcg cleanups on top.
> > Let's create a cgroup branch and build things there. I don't think > > cgroup changes are gonna be a single patch and expect to see at least > > some bug fixes afterwards and don't wanna keep them floating separate > > from other cgroup changes. > > > mm being based on top of -next, that should work, right? > > Well, a tree based on -next is, ehm, impractical. I can create a bug on > top of my -mm git branch (where I merge your cgroup common changes) for > development and then when we are ready we can send it as a series and > push it via Andrew. Would that work for you? > Or we can push the core part via Andrew, wait for the merge and work on > the follow up cleanups later? > It is not like the follow up part is really urgent, isn't it? I would > just like the memcg part settled first because this can potentially > conflict with other memcg work.
Argh... can we pretty *please* just do a plain git branch? I don't care where it is but I want to be able to pull it into cgroup core and yes I do wanna make this happen in this devel cycle. We've been sitting on it far too long waiting for memcg.
Thanks.
-- tejun
| |