From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: oleg@redhat.com, roland@redhat.com, vmayatsk@redhat.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] do_wait cleanupe (more to come)
Date: Mon, 11 May 2009 11:35:05 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090511113505.ca9384af.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090511122233.GE13954@elte.hu>
On Mon, 11 May 2009 14:22:33 +0200
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:
>
> * Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 7 May 2009 08:46:30 +0200
> > Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Slightly tested. Definitely this needs more testing, but since a) the
> > > second patch was reviewed by Ingo and b) Andrew likes the buggy patches
> > > very much, I am sending this series. At least I believe this all is
> > > right "in general".
> >
> > Worried. This hits on ptrace and there's a lot of ptrace work
> > pending, including large changes which are threatening to come in
> > via a different tree (security).
> >
> > If we end up with marginal/flakey patches in the middle of all of
> > this, a big mess ensues.
>
> This problems would be solved if all these bits were in -mm.
>
I merged them, but that didn't solve the problem. If more ptrace work
happens and then these patches turn out to be bad, we have a mess on
our hands.
IOW, merging "Slightly tested. Definitely this needs more testing"
patches into an area on ongoing development is a bit risky.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-05-11 18:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-05-07 6:46 [PATCH 0/5] do_wait cleanupe (more to come) Oleg Nesterov
2009-05-07 20:12 ` Andrew Morton
2009-05-11 12:22 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-05-11 18:35 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20090511113505.ca9384af.akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=roland@redhat.com \
--cc=vmayatsk@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox