> I don' t insult _you_. I simply don' t agree with your code and I
> say my reasons.
Well, you basically only responded to the parts of my
posts that suited you and ignored the other parts --
I found that a bit insulting/annoying.
But then again, I shouldn't do childish about that
so let's forget the flaimbaity part...
> And as second I continue to think my patch doesn' t need changes
> because it' s just very near to stall with kswapd running all the
> time and it' s far from failing allocating memory here. If somewhere
> it will fail I' d like to know.
2.2 is supposed to be a stable version, so risks like that
just can't be taken (IMHO).
> I am ignoring your "bad 2.1.8x days" argument just because many many
> things are changed from 2.1.8x and I can' t trust your "it' s the
> same" beacuse it _can' t_ be the same. There are so many differences
> that you can' t prove that my patch fail allocating memory because
> 8x was doing so.
A lot of things changed, yes, but not this central piece
of MM. Now that we're approaching a stable kernel release,
I just don't think we should take the risk of even a
hypothetical bug showing up.
Rik.
+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Linux memory management tour guide. H.H.vanRiel@phys.uu.nl |
| Scouting Vries cubscout leader. http://www.phys.uu.nl/~riel/ |
+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/