linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/34] Memory management performance backports for -stable V2

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: <20120724132741.GS9222@suse.de>
Date:	Tue, 24 Jul 2012 14:27:41 +0100
From:	Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>
To:	Hillf Danton <dhillf@...il.com>
Cc:	Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>, Stable <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/34] Memory management performance backports for
 -stable V2

On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 09:18:16PM +0800, Hillf Danton wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 1:58 PM, Mike Galbraith <efault@....de> wrote:
> > FWIW, I'm all for performance backports.  They do have a downside though
> > (other than the risk of bugs slipping in, or triggering latent bugs).
> >
> > When the next enterprise kernel is built, marketeers ask for numbers to
> > make potential customers drool over, and you _can't produce any_ because
> > you wedged all the spiffy performance stuff into the crusty old kernel.
> >
> Well do your job please.
> 

I would suggest the user in question use the normal support channels for
resolving a potentially SLES-specific bug.

-- 
Mel Gorman
SUSE Labs
--
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/