[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20090203114855.EC9D.KOSAKI.MOTOHIRO@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2009 22:40:14 +0900 (JST)
From: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
To: Brian Swetland <swetland@...gle.com>
Cc: kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com, Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
Arve Hj?nnev虍 <arve@...roid.com>,
Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
Pavel Machek <pavel@...e.cz>, arve@...gle.com,
San Mehat <san@...roid.com>, Robert Love <rlove@...gle.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
"linux-omap@...r.kernel.org" <linux-omap@...r.kernel.org>,
Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>,
ext Juha Yrj?l・
<juha.yrjola@...idboot.com>, viktor.rosendahl@...ia.com,
Trilok Soni <soni.trilok@...il.com>
Subject: Re: lowmemory android driver not needed?
Hi
> [Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>]
> > > but I don't think driver/staging is good place for non driver code.
> > > The problem is, any patch must be reviewed by stakeholder, not maintenar only.
> > > then, the patch should post lkml and subsystem mailing list at first.
> > >
> > > I like reviewed code than unreviewed code.
> >
> > Heh, so do I.
> >
> > And this is an odd "driver", I do know that.
> >
> > But it solves a real problem that can't be solved any other way
> > currently, which is needed for a real system that is shipping. So, if
> > it can't be solved any other way, do you have a way this kind of thing
> > could be more "correct"?
I agree this patch address correct requirement.
> I think a lot of the confusion here comes from Arve's earlier (very
> terse) remark: "I never expected it to be merged. I wrote it to allow
> us to ship a product."
>
> At the risk of putting words in his mouth, I believe this should be
> parsed as "we wrote this to solve problems necessary to ship products
> and did not expect it to be merged to mainline as-is".
ok. I believe you.
I also hope that I'm working with various background guys.
thanks.
> We'd love to get support for low memory process killing that works for
> our app model into the mainline.
>
> If that's by reworking this driver
> until it's acceptable or by implementing the same functionality a
> different way, making use of some other subsystem, or whatever, we're
> not particularly picky. Our goal is, eventually, to maintain as few
> patches outside of the kernel as possible so things can build "out of
> the box."
--
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