On Tue, 26 Jun 2018, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Mon 25-06-18 21:15:03, Kani Toshimitsu wrote: > > Lastly, for the code maintenance, I believe this memory allocation keeps > > the code much simpler than it would otherwise need to manage a special > > page list. > > Yes, I can see a simplicity as a reasonable argument for a quick fix, > which these pile is supposed to be AFAIU. So this might be good to go > from that perspective, but I believe that this should be changed in > future at least. So the conclusion is, that we ship this set of patches now to cure the existing wreckage, right? Fine with that, but who will take care of reworking it proper? I'm concerned that this will just go stale the moment the fixes hit the tree. Thanks, tglx
