From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Balbir Singh Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] swapcgroup(v2) Date: Tue, 27 May 2008 19:16:40 +0530 Message-ID: <483C10C0.7040503@linux.vnet.ibm.com> References: <483647AB.8090104@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp> <20080527073118.0D92B5A0E@siro.lan> <483BBB4C.3040501@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <483BC690.6010206@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp> <483C0A0D.50909@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <483C0FB2.7080706@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp> Reply-To: balbir-23VcF4HTsmIX0ybBhKVfKdBPR1lH4CV8@public.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <483C0FB2.7080706-YQH0OdQVrdy45+QrQBaojngSJqDPrsil@public.gmane.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: containers-bounces-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org Errors-To: containers-bounces-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org To: Daisuke Nishimura Cc: YAMAMOTO Takashi , linux-mm-Bw31MaZKKs3YtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org, containers-qjLDD68F18O7TbgM5vRIOg@public.gmane.org, hugh-DTz5qymZ9yRBDgjK7y7TUQ@public.gmane.org, xemul-GEFAQzZX7r8dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org List-Id: containers.vger.kernel.org Daisuke Nishimura wrote: > On 2008/05/27 22:18 +0900, Balbir Singh wrote: >> Daisuke Nishimura wrote: >>> On 2008/05/27 16:42 +0900, Balbir Singh wrote: >>>> YAMAMOTO Takashi wrote: >>>>> hi, >>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks for looking into this. Yamamoto-San is also looking into a swap >>>>>>> controller. Is there a consensus on the approach? >>>>>>> >>>>>> Not yet, but I think we should have some consensus each other >>>>>> before going further. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>> Daisuke Nishimura. >>>>> while nishimura-san's one still seems to have a lot of todo, >>>>> it seems good enough as a start point to me. >>>>> so i'd like to withdraw mine. >>>>> >>>>> nishimura-san, is it ok for you? >>>>> >>> Of cource. >>> I'll work hard to make it better. >>> >>>> I would suggest that me merge the good parts from both into the swap controller. >>>> Having said that I'll let the two of you decide on what the good aspects of both >>>> are. I cannot see any immediate overlap, but there might be some w.r.t. >>>> infrastructure used. >>>> >>> Well, you mean you'll make another patch based on yamamoto-san's >>> and mine? >>> >>> Basically, I think it's difficult to merge >>> because we charge different objects. >>> >> Yes, I know - that's why I said infrastructure, to see the grouping and common >> data structure aspects. I'll try and review the code. >> > OK. > > I'll wait for your patch. Hi, Daisuke-San I am not sending out any patch (sorry for the confusion, if I caused it). I am going to review the swapcgroup patchset. -- Warm Regards, Balbir Singh Linux Technology Center IBM, ISTL