Oleg Nesterov <oleg@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On 06/10, Eric W. Biederman wrote: >> >> Personally I don't think anyone sane would intentionally depend on this >> and I don't think there is a sufficiently reliable way to depend on this >> by accident that people would actually be depending on it. > > Agreed. > > As I said I like these changes and I see nothing wrong. To me they fix the > current behaviour, or at least make it more consistent. > > But perhaps this should be documented in the changelog? To make it clear > that this change was intentional. Good point. I had not documented it because I thought I was only disabling an optimization. Eric
