From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1161361AbWGJHIJ (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Jul 2006 03:08:09 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1161368AbWGJHIJ (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Jul 2006 03:08:09 -0400 Received: from smtp105.mail.mud.yahoo.com ([209.191.85.215]:53675 "HELO smtp105.mail.mud.yahoo.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1161361AbWGJHIH (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Jul 2006 03:08:07 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com.au; h=Received:Message-ID:Date:From:User-Agent:X-Accept-Language:MIME-Version:To:CC:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=te/NnarAtFUFmnNQBJrrCW7vrpWcfspch9iZes3B2Xi9zlghBBajErXNpq8T2GE1xbV5EU/haUjSwg05LKsJHeJdOEePFAv6q7M83AdwTPHFNJVeHtrxffTYO3VPON09vMYxdEJBxp34ji700LT7FEP5XAhG9l5LzPik4rGSU5U= ; Message-ID: <44B1F9E3.5030701@yahoo.com.au> Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2006 16:55:31 +1000 From: Nick Piggin User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.12) Gecko/20051007 Debian/1.7.12-1 X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Con Kolivas CC: linux list , torvalds@osdl.org, ck list , Andrew Morton Subject: Re: 2.6.18-rc1 References: <200607101308.26291.kernel@kolivas.org> In-Reply-To: <200607101308.26291.kernel@kolivas.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Con Kolivas wrote: > I see the merge window closed and swap prefetch got bypassed again. I'd like > to believe it was an oversight but far more likely that Andrew remains > undecided about whether it should go in or not. > > No bug reports have come from it in 6 months, the code has remained unchanged > for 3 months, it is as unobtrusive as a driver that is not compiled in > when !CONFIGed and there are numerous reports from satisfied users (even ones > that made it to the scary grounds of lkml). The only thing that happens is > Nick keeps threatening to review it over and over and over and.... I was going to review it again, but I noticed it has still has comments (from Hugh and I, I believe) which still haven't been implemented. Like duplicating most of read_swap_cache_async. I thought you might have some improvements on the way, so I hadn't bothered yet. But... excuse me? I *threaten* to review it? I volunteered to review it a couple of times and found several problems. But OK if you take that as a threat, then I won't review it. And I haven't seen any numbers to show it even works in ideal conditions after I told you how to fix the watermark code, let alone the real world situations in which it is supposed to help (not that that seems to be a showstopper to merging stuff like this, though) I personally won't advocate it, but I wouldn't be upset if it goes in... it isn't entirely unobtrusive: it is pretty close to the core mm, and will have to be maintained as such. Mainly in Hugh's area, so he would have a final veto there. > > I'm not sure what else needs to happen? > Probably if nothing happens, it sounds like Andrew will merge it eventually. -- SUSE Labs, Novell Inc. Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com