On Tue, 2005-11-08 at 17:00 +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
>
> > However, I appreciate your preference to separate cleanup from semantic
> > change. Perhaps this means leaving the ALLOC_CPUSET flag in your
> > cleanup patch, then one of us following on top of that with a patch to
> > simplify and fix the cpuset invocation semantics and a second cleanup
> > patch to remove ALLOC_CPUSET as a separate flag.
> >
>
> That would be good. I'll send off a fresh patch with the
> ALLOC_WATERMARKS fixed after Rohit gets around to looking over
> it.
>
Nick, your changes have really come out good. Thanks. I think it is
definitely a good starting point as it maintains all of existing
behavior.
I guess now I can argue about why we should keep the watermark low for
GFP_HIGH ;-)
Paul, sorry for troubling you with those magic numbers again in the
original patch...
-rohit
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
