From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Wed, 7 May 2008 13:30:39 -0700 (PDT) From: Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: [PATCH 01 of 11] mmu-notifier-core In-Reply-To: <20080507130528.adfd154c.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Message-ID: References: <20080507130528.adfd154c.akpm@linux-foundation.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Andrew Morton Cc: Andrea Arcangeli , clameter@sgi.com, steiner@sgi.com, holt@sgi.com, npiggin@suse.de, a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl, kvm-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, kanojsarcar@yahoo.com, rdreier@cisco.com, swise@opengridcomputing.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, avi@qumranet.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, general@lists.openfabrics.org, hugh@veritas.com, rusty@rustcorp.com.au, aliguori@us.ibm.com, chrisw@redhat.com, marcelo@kvack.org, dada1@cosmosbay.com, paulmck@us.ibm.com List-ID: On Wed, 7 May 2008, Andrew Morton wrote: > > The patch looks OK to me. As far as I can tell, authorship has been destroyed by at least two of the patches (ie Christoph seems to be the author, but Andrea seems to have dropped that fact). > The proposal is that we sneak this into 2.6.26. Are there any > sufficiently-serious objections to this? Yeah, too late and no upside. That "locking" code is also too ugly to live, at least without some serious arguments for why it has to be done that way. Sorting the locks? In a vmalloc'ed area? And calling this something innocuous like "mm_lock()"? Hell no. That code needs some serious re-thinking. Linus -- 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