On Sat, 2 Sep 2000, bert hubert wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 01, 2000 at 03:58:22PM -0300, Rik van Riel wrote:
> > > filesystem? It starts swapping like mad and generally behaves
> > > indecently, despite the huge 1024M of RAM it has.
> > http://www.surriel.com/patches/2.4.0-t8p1-vmpatch2
> > I'm working on these issues and seem to be pretty close
> > to having fixed most of them now...
> In the interest of preventing closed-room development, wouldn't
> it be a good idea to merge your patches NOW? A lot of knowledge
> would be gained very rapidly. Not many people can be bothered to
> merge your patches right now.
Indeed, it may be time for wider testing of my VM patch.
It is somewhat obvious that we want to fix VM performance
before we release 2.4 and my patch seems to have almost
> The only problem would be a stability decrease for current 2.4.0
> production users.
Not really. I'm not aware of any bug with my VM that doesn't
occur in the standard VM too.
> Developers however will have lots more chances to improve the
> new VM and submit patches.
They'll have more chances to observe the behaviour of the new
VM and make it behave well under more workloads. From this POV
it would be right to merge the new VM now.
OTOH, we /are/ in a code freeze ...
-- "What you're running that piece of shit Gnome?!?!" -- Miguel de Icaza, UKUUG 2000
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to email@example.com Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Sep 07 2000 - 21:00:13 EST