On Tue, Jul 03, 2012 at 03:38:39PM +0400, Glauber Costa wrote: > On 06/29/2012 02:25 AM, Andrew Morton wrote: > > On Thu, 28 Jun 2012 13:01:23 +0400 > > Glauber Costa <glommer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > >> > >> ... > >> > > > > OK, that all sounds convincing ;) Please summarise and capture this > > discussion in the [patch 0/n] changelog so we (or others) don't have to > > go through this all again. And let's remember this in the next > > patchset! > > Thanks, will surely do. > > >> Last, but not least, note that it is totally within my interests to > >> merge the slab tracking as fast as we can. it'll be a matter of going > >> back to it, and agreeing in the final form. > > > > Yes, I'd very much like to have the whole slab implementation in a > > reasonably mature state before proceeding too far with this base > > patchset. > > Does that means that you want to merge them together? I am more than > happy to post the slab part again ontop of that to have people reviewing it. > > But if possible, I believe that merging this part first would help us to > split up testing in a beneficial way, in the sense that if it breaks, we > know at least in which part it is. Not to mention, of course, that > reviewers will have an easier time reviewing it as two pieces. Definetly yeah. This makes the review easier for this tricky chunk. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>