Re: [PATCH 00/34] Memory management performance backports for -stable V2

Mike Galbraith
2012-07-24T13:52:24Z

On Tue, 2012-07-24 at 21:18 +0800, Hillf Danton wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 1:58 PM, Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de> wrote:
> > FWIW, I'm all for performance backports. They do have a downside though
> > (other than the risk of bugs slipping in, or triggering latent bugs).
> >
> > When the next enterprise kernel is built, marketeers ask for numbers to
> > make potential customers drool over, and you _can't produce any_ because
> > you wedged all the spiffy performance stuff into the crusty old kernel.
> >
> Well do your job please.
>
> Suse 11 SP1 kernel panic on HP hardware
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/7/24/136

Last time I looked, handling SUSE support issues on LKML was not in my
job description. I don't recall seeing anything about taking direction
from random LKML subscribers either.

-Mike