Hi Pekka, On 06/05/2010 02:05 PM, Pekka Enberg wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 10:19 PM, Andrew Morton > <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> I thought zram is related to memory management a little bit. >>> >>> What's the criteria? >> >> Yes, and this is something which bothers me a bit about the -staging >> process. Code gets in there largely under the radar of the people who >> work in that area. It gets "matured" for a while and the developer >> thinks it's all ready to go into "mainline" and .... then what? >> Someone needs to yank the code out of -staging and tell the interested >> parties "hey, look at this". And at this stage, they might say "hell >> no", or request large changes and the developer who thought everything >> was all ready to go would be justifiably upset. >> >> Obviously, this hasn't happened (much) with zram (partly because I >> happened to notice it), but the potential is there. >> >> I'm not sure what a good solution is, really. Obviously it would be >> better if such code went straight into the subsystem maintainer's tree >> on day one and got worked on there. But if that process was working >> efficiently, we wouldn't have ever needed ./staging/. > > I thought the idea here is that when zram is "good enough", Nitin or > Greg would post squashed patches of it for review and if maintainers > are ready to take it, we'd merge the full history from -staging. > > Not sure what Nitin's or Greg's plans are but I think it might be > realistic to try to get zram properly merged for 2.6.36. > Yes, I'm planning to move it to drivers proper in 2.6.36. >> So I suppose we (ie: Greg ;)) should identify the destination >> maintainer at the outset and make sure that the maintainer(s) and the >> subsystem mailing list are kept in the loop on all developments, and >> that they're aware that this code is headed their way. Perhaps that's >> already happening and I missed it. > > Ramzswap and zram have been discussed on LKML. I guess Nitin should > have CC'd linux-mm as well for you to see it? There hasn't been huge > interest in reviewing the code which is why I suggested -staging in > the first place. It ought to be a place where we can do in-tree > development while we wait for the busy maintainers to have the chance > to look at the code, no? > Its all somewhat related to "compressed caching", so maybe linux-mm should be added. I will do so for future patches which makes non-trivial changes. Thanks for your reviews and ACKs. Nitin _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
