linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Fix cpuset sched_relax_domain

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20080506204054.564fff32.pj@sgi.com>
Date:	Tue, 6 May 2008 20:40:54 -0500
From:	Paul Jackson <pj@....com>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	menage@...gle.com, seto.hidetoshi@...fujitsu.com, mingo@...e.hu,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix cpuset sched_relax_domain_level control file

Andrew wrote:
> There is a patch in linux-next called "cpuset: system sets" which will
> conflict with your change.

Yeah - I was looking at that patch earlier today, when I was
scratching my head, trying to figure out what I broke with
mmotm.

I still don't like it.  The conversation evolved into a couple of
positions, mine and someone elses, I forget whom.  From what I
can recall now, neither of those positions endorsed the original
patch, as you have it.  Then the conversation died out, as all
parties involved other than perhaps myself prefer to work on stuff
that can result in successful patches, rather than ongoing debates.

What's the easiest way to get from where we are now, to a world
without that patch?

-- 
                  I won't rest till it's the best ...
                  Programmer, Linux Scalability
                  Paul Jackson <pj@....com> 1.940.382.4214
--
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/