| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2012 10:47:18 +0300 From: Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org> To: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...il.com> Cc: Anton Vorontsov <cbouatmailru@...il.com>, Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>, Leonid Moiseichuk <leonid.moiseichuk@...ia.com>, John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org, patches@...aro.org, kernel-team@...roid.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] Some vmevent fixes... On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 11:05 PM, KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...il.com> wrote: >> Note that 1) and 2) are not problems per se, it's just implementation >> details, easy stuff. Vmevent is basically an ABI/API, and I didn't >> hear anybody who would object to vmevent ABI idea itself. More than >> this, nobody stop us from implementing in-kernel vmevent API, and >> make Android Lowmemory killer use it, if we want to. > > I never agree "it's mere ABI" discussion. Until the implementation is ugly, > I never agree the ABI even if syscall interface is very clean. I don't know what discussion you are talking about. I also don't agree that something should be merged just because the ABI is clean. The implementation must also make sense. I don't see how we disagree here at all. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists