Re: [patch 1/2] mm, memcg: avoid oom notification when current needs access to memory reserves

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Mon, 20 Jan 2014, Greg Kroah-Hartmann wrote:

> > The patches getting proposed through -mm for stable boggles my mind
> > sometimes.
> 
> Do you have any objections to patches that I have taken for -stable?  If
> so, please let me know.
> 

You've haven't taken the ones that I outlined in 
http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=138580717728759, so I'm happy that 
those could be prevented.  I'm identifying another patch here that is 
pending in -mm that obviously violates the stable kernel rules and I don't 
believe it should be annotated in a way that you'll scoop it up later.

The patch in question hasn't been tested by anybody and I don't think you 
want such things to ever be merged into a stable kernel series.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe cgroups" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html




[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [eCos]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]     [Monitors]

  Powered by Linux