Memory controller merge (was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24)

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Balbir Singh
Date: Monday, October 1, 2007 - 9:21 pm

Andrew Morton wrote:

Hi, Andrew,

I mostly agree with your decision. I am a little concerned however
that as we develop and add more features (a.k.a better statistics/
forced reclaim), which are very important; the code base gets larger,
the review takes longer :)

I was hopeful of getting the bare minimal infrastructure for memory
control in mainline, so that review is easy and additional changes
can be well reviewed as well.

Here are the pros and cons of merging the memory controller

Pros
1. Smaller size, easy to review and merge
2. Incremental development, makes it easier to maintain the
   code

Cons
1. Needs more review like you said
2. Although the UI is stable, it's a good chance to review
   it once more before merging the code into mainline

Having said that, I'll continue testing the patches and make the
solution more complete and usable.


-- 
	Warm Regards,
	Balbir Singh
	Linux Technology Center
	IBM, ISTL
-
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
-mm merge plans for 2.6.24, Andrew Morton, (Mon Oct 1, 2:22 pm)
wibbling over the cpuset shed domain connnection, Paul Jackson, (Mon Oct 1, 2:34 pm)
Memory controller merge (was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24), Balbir Singh, (Mon Oct 1, 9:21 pm)
x86 patches was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24, Andi Kleen, (Mon Oct 1, 11:18 pm)
Re: x86 patches was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24, Andrew Morton, (Mon Oct 1, 11:32 pm)
Re: x86 patches was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24, Andi Kleen, (Tue Oct 2, 12:01 am)
Re: x86 patches was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24, Andrew Morton, (Tue Oct 2, 12:18 am)
Re: x86 patches was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki, (Tue Oct 2, 12:36 am)
Re: x86 patches was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24, Ingo Molnar, (Tue Oct 2, 12:37 am)
Re: x86 patches was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24, Andrew Morton, (Tue Oct 2, 12:43 am)
Re: x86 patches was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24, Andi Kleen, (Tue Oct 2, 12:46 am)
Re: x86 patches was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24, Matt Mackall, (Tue Oct 2, 12:55 am)
Re: x86 patches was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24, Thomas Gleixner, (Tue Oct 2, 12:58 am)
Re: x86 patches was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24, Andi Kleen, (Tue Oct 2, 12:59 am)
v4l-stk11xx* [Was: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24], Jiri Slaby, (Tue Oct 2, 12:59 am)
Re: x86 patches was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki, (Tue Oct 2, 1:16 am)
per BDI dirty limit (was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24), Peter Zijlstra, (Tue Oct 2, 1:17 am)
writeback fixes, Fengguang Wu, (Tue Oct 2, 1:39 am)
Re: x86 patches was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24, Andy Whitcroft, (Tue Oct 2, 2:26 am)
Re: x86 patches was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24, Yasunori Goto, (Tue Oct 2, 3:48 am)
Re: wibbling over the cpuset shed domain connnection, Nick Piggin, (Tue Oct 2, 5:36 am)
Re: wibbling over the cpuset shed domain connnection, Nick Piggin, (Tue Oct 2, 6:12 am)
Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24, Pekka Enberg, (Tue Oct 2, 9:12 am)
new aops merge [was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24], Hugh Dickins, (Tue Oct 2, 9:21 am)
Re: x86 patches was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24, Nish Aravamudan, (Tue Oct 2, 9:40 am)
Re: x86 patches was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24, Lee Schermerhorn, (Tue Oct 2, 10:17 am)
Re: x86 patches was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24, Lee Schermerhorn, (Tue Oct 2, 10:25 am)
remove zero_page (was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24), Nick Piggin, (Tue Oct 2, 10:45 am)
Re: x86 patches was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24, Christoph Lameter, (Tue Oct 2, 11:16 am)
Re: x86 patches was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24, Christoph Lameter, (Tue Oct 2, 11:18 am)
Re: kswapd min order, slub max order [was Re: -mm merge pl ..., Christoph Lameter, (Tue Oct 2, 11:28 am)
Re: wibbling over the cpuset shed domain connnection, Paul Jackson, (Tue Oct 2, 10:21 pm)
Re: wibbling over the cpuset shed domain connnection, Paul Jackson, (Wed Oct 3, 12:00 am)
Re: wibbling over the cpuset shed domain connnection, Andrew Morton, (Wed Oct 3, 3:57 am)
Re: per BDI dirty limit (was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24), Martin Knoblauch, (Wed Oct 3, 4:00 am)
Re: remove zero_page (was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24), Linus Torvalds, (Wed Oct 3, 8:21 am)
r/o bind mounts, was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24, Christoph Hellwig, (Tue Oct 9, 2:19 am)
Re: remove zero_page (was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24), Linus Torvalds, (Tue Oct 9, 7:52 am)
Re: remove zero_page (was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24), Linus Torvalds, (Tue Oct 9, 7:22 pm)
Re: remove zero_page (was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24), Linus Torvalds, (Tue Oct 9, 8:06 pm)
Re: remove zero_page (was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24), Linus Torvalds, (Tue Oct 9, 10:20 pm)
Re: remove zero_page (was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24), Linus Torvalds, (Wed Oct 10, 8:04 am)
Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24, Borislav Petkov, (Sat Oct 13, 1:44 am)
Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24, Andrew Morton, (Sat Oct 13, 1:52 am)
Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24, Borislav Petkov, (Sat Oct 13, 4:45 am)
Re: per BDI dirty limit (was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24), Trond Myklebust, (Fri Oct 26, 9:37 am)
[PATCH] mm: sysfs: expose the BDI object in sysfs, Peter Zijlstra, (Fri Nov 2, 7:59 am)