Re: [RFC][PATCH] mm: Fix RLIMIT_MEMLOCK

[Ingo Molnar]

* KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Hi
> 
> I'm unhappy you guys uses offensive word so much. Please cool down all 
> you guys. :-/ In fact, _BOTH_ the behavior before and after Cristoph's 
> patch doesn't have cleaner semantics.

Erm, this feature _regressed_ after the patch. All other concerns are 
secondary. What's so difficult to understand about that?

> And PeterZ proposed make new cleaner one rather than revert. No need to 
> hassle.

Sorry, that's not how we deal with regressions upstream...

I've been pretty polite in fact, compared to say Linus - someone should 
put a politically correct summary of:

   https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/2/22/456
   https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/3/26/1113

into Documentation/, people keep forgetting about it.

I'm sorry if being direct and to the point offends you [no, not really], 
this discussion got _way_ off the real track it should be on: that this is 
a _regression_.

Thanks,

	Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/