From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <462C8922.7070401@shadowen.org> Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2007 11:23:30 +0100 From: Andy Whitcroft MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] introduce HIGH_ORDER delineating easily reclaimable orders References: <20070421012843.f5a814eb.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20070421013210.1bed9ceb.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20070421013210.1bed9ceb.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Andrew Morton Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Mel Gorman List-ID: Andrew Morton wrote: > On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 01:28:43 -0700 Andrew Morton wrote: > >> It would have been better to have patched page_alloc.c independently, then >> to have used HIGH_ORDER in "lumpy: increase pressure at the end of the inactive >> list". > > Actually that doesn't matter, because I plan on lumping all the lumpy patches > together into one lump. > > I was going to duck patches #2 and #3, such was my outrage. But given that > it's all lined up to be a single patch, followup cleanup patches will fit in > OK. Please. Yes. Its funny how you can get so close to a change that you can no longer see the obvious warts on it. I am actually travelling today, so it'll be tommorrow now. But I'll roll the cleanups and get them to you. I can also offer you a clean drop in lumpy stack with the HIGH_ORDER change pulled out to the top once you are happy. -apw -- 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