Re: [patch 1/2] mm, memcg: avoid oom notification when current needs access to memory reserves

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Mon, 20 Jan 2014, Greg Kroah-Hartmann wrote:

> > The patches getting proposed through -mm for stable boggles my mind
> > sometimes.
> 
> Do you have any objections to patches that I have taken for -stable?  If
> so, please let me know.
> 

You've haven't taken the ones that I outlined in 
http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=138580717728759, so I'm happy that 
those could be prevented.  I'm identifying another patch here that is 
pending in -mm that obviously violates the stable kernel rules and I don't 
believe it should be annotated in a way that you'll scoop it up later.

The patch in question hasn't been tested by anybody and I don't think you 
want such things to ever be merged into a stable kernel series.

--
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>




[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [ECOS]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]