>
>> From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo [mailto:acme@conectiva.com.br]
>>
>> > > And I don't really want to review a 176 KB patch (although I did
> already
>> > > look over most of it a few days ago). Do people want to take portions
>> of it for review and then see about Alan merging it, e.g.?
>
> As long as they use set_current_state() and not the __ counterpart, then
> they are ok [the memory barrier being to blame for the lost
> performance if any is found].
Yes, last week at least the patch did use set_current_state() almost
exclusively, even when it didn't need to -- most likely.
>> > Hmm. Has anyone considered a "Kernel Janitor's" tree? More
> specifically,
>> > a patch set, much like -ac or -mm, with the current cleanups so they can
>> be tested, pulled, run through automated batch testing, etc.?
>>
>> That is an interesting idea, I'll probably start one.
Yay!
Thanks, acme.
~Randy
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed May 07 2003 - 22:00:29 EST