On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 03:02:15PM -0700, Matt Helsley wrote: > > Sure, that was completely embedded in the kernel and things can be > > implemented and fixed with much less consideration. I can see how > > that would be easier for the specific use case, but that EXACTLY is > > why it can't go upstream. I just can't see it happening and think it > > It can't go upstream because it's too easy to implement and fix? > It can't go upstream because it has a specific use case? > Is there something that says every interface added to the kernel *must* > be useful for something besides the purpose that originally inspired it? You really don't understand what I'm trying to say at all? > > would be far more productive spending the time and energy looking for > > and implementing solutions which actually can go mainline. If you > > Oh, you mean stuff that's hard to implement and fix? ;) We've talked about this over and over again. If you wanna pursue in-kernel implementation, please go ahead and keep at it. Good luck. -- tejun _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
