Re: page migration\

[Hirokazu Takahashi <taka@valinux.co.jp>]

Hi,

> > Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> > 
> > >Memory migration makes sense for defragmentation too.
> > >
> > >I think we enough arguments for merging the migration code first, as you 
> > >suggest.
> > >
> > >Its also easier to merge part-by-part than everything in one bunch.
> > >
> > >Yes?
> > 
> > Absolutely.  I guess the only question is when to propose the merge with -mm
> > etc.  Is your defragmentation code in a good enough state to be proposed as
> > well, or should we wait a bit?
> 
> No, we have to wait - its not ready yet.
> 
> But it is really simple and small, as soon as the "asynchronous" memory migration is working.
>
> > I think we need at least one user of the code before we can propose that the
> > memory migration code be merged, or do you think we the arguments are strong
> > enough we can proceed with users "pending"?
> 
> IMO the arguments are strong enough that we can proceed with the current state.
> I'm all for it.
> 
> Andrew knows the importance and the users of the memory migration infrastructure.
> 
> Dave, Hirokazu, what are your thoughts on this

Andrew is interested in our approach.
With Ray's help, it will proceed faster and become stable soon:)

> Shall we CC Andrew?
> 
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"aart@kvack.org"> aart@kvack.org </a>