From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoph Lameter Subject: Re: MMU notifiers review and some proposals Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2008 09:19:01 -0500 Message-ID: <4891C9D5.8000500@linux-foundation.org> References: <20080724143949.GB12897@wotan.suse.de> <20080725214552.GB21150@duo.random> <20080726030810.GA18896@wotan.suse.de> <20080726113813.GD21150@duo.random> <20080726122826.GA17958@wotan.suse.de> <20080726130202.GA9598@duo.random> <20080726131450.GC21820@wotan.suse.de> <48907880.3020105@linux-foundation.org> <20080730145436.GJ11494@duo.random> <48908BD4.10408@linux-foundation.org> <20080731061419.GB32644@wotan.suse.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from smtp1.linux-foundation.org ([140.211.169.13]:58199 "EHLO smtp1.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751375AbYGaOTl (ORCPT ); Thu, 31 Jul 2008 10:19:41 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20080731061419.GB32644@wotan.suse.de> Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Nick Piggin Cc: Andrea Arcangeli , Andrew Morton , Linus Torvalds , Linux Memory Management List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, steiner@sgi.com Nick Piggin wrote: > That's OK. We don't have to make decisions just by people supporting one > way or the other, because I'll come up with some competing patches and > if they turn out to be significantly simpler to the core VM without having > a significant negative impact on performance then naturally everybody should > be happy to merge them, so nobody has to argue with handwaving. We make decisions based on technical issues. If you can come up with a solution that addresses the issues (please review the earlier discussion on the subject matter) then we will all be happy to see that merged.