On 07/31/2012 08:30 PM, Frederic Weisbecker wrote: > On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 06:38:11PM +0400, Glauber Costa wrote: >> Hi, >> >> This is the slab part of the kmem limitation mechanism in its last form. I >> would like to have comments on it to see if we can agree in its form. I >> consider it mature, since it doesn't change much in essence over the last >> forms. However, I would still prefer to defer merging it and merge the >> stack-only patchset first (even if inside the same merge window). That patchset >> contains most of the infrastructure needed here, and merging them separately >> would not only reduce the complexity for reviewers, but allow us a chance to >> have independent testing on them both. I would also likely benefit from some >> extra testing, to make sure the recent changes didn't introduce anything bad. > > What is the status of the stack-only limitation patchset BTW? Does anybody oppose > to its merging? > > Thanks. > Andrew said he would like to see the slab patches in a relatively mature state first. I do believe they are in such a state. There are bugs, that I am working on - but I don't see anything that would change them significantly at this point. If Andrew is happy with what he saw in this thread, I could post those again. -- 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>