From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Tue, 1 May 2007 01:54:22 -0700 From: Andrew Morton Subject: Re: 2.6.22 -mm merge plans -- vm bugfixes Message-Id: <20070501015422.4b54a5d0.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <4636FDD7.9080401@yahoo.com.au> References: <20070430162007.ad46e153.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <4636FDD7.9080401@yahoo.com.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Nick Piggin Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, Hugh Dickins , Andrea Arcangeli , Christoph Hellwig List-ID: On Tue, 01 May 2007 18:44:07 +1000 Nick Piggin wrote: > > mm-simplify-filemap_nopage.patch > > mm-fix-fault-vs-invalidate-race-for-linear-mappings.patch > > mm-merge-populate-and-nopage-into-fault-fixes-nonlinear.patch > > mm-merge-nopfn-into-fault.patch > > convert-hugetlbfs-to-use-vm_ops-fault.patch > > mm-remove-legacy-cruft.patch > > mm-debug-check-for-the-fault-vs-invalidate-race.patch > > > mm-fix-clear_page_dirty_for_io-vs-fault-race.patch > > > Miscish MM changes. Will merge, dependent upon what still applies and works > > if the moveable-zone patches get stalled. > > These fix some bugs in the core vm, at least the former one we have > seen numerous people hitting in production... > > I don't suppose you mean these are logically dependant on new features > sitting below them in your patch stack, just that you don't want to > spend time fixing a lot of rejects? It'll probably be OK - I just haven't checked yet. I'm fairly handy at fixing rejects nowadays ;) Nobody seems to be taking up this opportunity to provide us with review and test results on the antifrag patches. -- 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: email@kvack.org