Re: 2.6.18 -mm merge plans

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



"Serge E. Hallyn" <[email protected]> writes:

> Quoting Andrew Morton ([email protected]):
>> proc-sysctl-add-_proc_do_string-helper.patch
>> namespaces-add-nsproxy.patch
>> namespaces-add-nsproxy-dont-include-compileh.patch
>> namespaces-incorporate-fs-namespace-into-nsproxy.patch
>> namespaces-utsname-introduce-temporary-helpers.patch
>> namespaces-utsname-switch-to-using-uts-namespaces.patch
>> namespaces-utsname-switch-to-using-uts-namespaces-alpha-fix.patch
>> namespaces-utsname-switch-to-using-uts-namespaces-cleanup.patch
>> namespaces-utsname-use-init_utsname-when-appropriate.patch
>> namespaces-utsname-use-init_utsname-when-appropriate-cifs-update.patch
>> namespaces-utsname-implement-utsname-namespaces.patch
>> namespaces-utsname-implement-utsname-namespaces-export.patch
>> namespaces-utsname-implement-utsname-namespaces-dont-include-compileh.patch
>> namespaces-utsname-sysctl-hack.patch
>> namespaces-utsname-sysctl-hack-cleanup.patch
>> namespaces-utsname-sysctl-hack-cleanup-2.patch
>> namespaces-utsname-sysctl-hack-cleanup-2-fix.patch
>> namespaces-utsname-remove-system_utsname.patch
>> namespaces-utsname-implement-clone_newuts-flag.patch
>> uts-copy-nsproxy-only-when-needed.patch
>> # needed if git-klibc isn't there:
>> #namespaces-utsname-switch-to-using-uts-namespaces-klibc-bit.patch
>> #namespaces-utsname-use-init_utsname-when-appropriate-klibc-bit.patch
>> #namespaces-utsname-switch-to-using-uts-namespaces-klibc-bit-2.patch
>> 
>>  utsname virtualisation.  This doesn't seem very pointful as a standalone
>>  thing.  That's a general problem with infrastructural work for a very
>>  large new feature.
>> 
>>  So probably I'll continue to babysit these patches, unless someone can
>>  identify a decent reason why mainline needs this work.
>> 
>>  I don't want to carry an ever-growing stream of OS-virtualisation
>>  groundwork patches for ever and ever so if we're going to do this thing...
>>  faster, please.

Ack.  I agree we need to start moving faster.
I had a couple of distractions but I should be sending out some
relevant patches in a bit.  The more we can get out for review
before kernel summit the better the conversation will be I suspect.

> Eric, Kirill, Dave, Hubertus,
>
> In the spirit of 'faster, please', does someone care to port and
> resubmit a pidspace patch?

I think I can get that one. Except for the very tail end though
most of my patches probably won't be directly pidspace patches.
I'm going to work on killing sys_sysctl a little before I
get to far into that.   A pidspace is one of the most controversial
patches so it is a bit tricky.

> I'll do it if noone else wants to, just don't want to step on anyone's
> toes if you were already working on it.

If you want to help with the bare pid to struct pid conversion I
don't have any outstanding patches, and getting that done kills
some theoretical pid wrap around problems as well as laying the ground
work for a simple pidspace implementation.

Eric
-
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]
  Powered by Linux