[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180605101544.GB5464@castle>
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2018 11:15:45 +0100
From: Roman Gushchin <guro@...com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
CC: <linux-mm@...ck.org>, <kernel-team@...com>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov.dev@...il.com>,
Greg Thelen <gthelen@...gle.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] mm: don't skip memory guarantee calculations
On Tue, Jun 05, 2018 at 11:03:49AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Mon 04-06-18 17:23:06, Roman Gushchin wrote:
> [...]
> > I'm happy to discuss any concrete issues/concerns, but I really see
> > no reasons to drop it from the mm tree now and start the discussion
> > from scratch.
>
> I do not think this is ready for the current merge window. Sorry! I
> would really prefer to see the whole thing in one series to have a
> better picture.
Please, provide any specific reason for that. I appreciate your opinion,
but *I think* it's not an argument, seriously.
We've discussed the patchset back to March and I made several iterations
based on the received feedback. Later we had a separate discussion with Greg,
who proposed an alternative solution, which, unfortunately, had some serious
shortcomings. And, as I remember, some time ago we've discussed memory.min
with you.
And now you want to start from scratch without providing any reason.
I find it counter-productive, sorry.
Thanks!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists