Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > On 12/18/09, Hiroshi Shimamoto <h-shimamoto@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> So we never allow to make memory usage small with providing an option >> to remove unused area, right? > > We certainly allow this if it results in zero loss in functionality. > >> If I want to reduce memory usage by this way, should I keep >> this kind of patches out of tree? > > Certainly nobody can prohibit you from keeping patch out of tree. > But if you want something mainlinable, moving ->journal_info > to fs-specific data structures should do the trick. Or something. Why doesn't this use EMBEDDED? I.e. boot "xxx" if EMBEDDED default y style Kconfig. Only reason which seems reasonable is "this is done only for one pointer on task_struct". This reason seems something like "You care, but I don't care it". And, other reasons is *normal* situation on EMBEDDED, right? Thanks. -- OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
