[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Sat, 5 May 2007 02:55:10 -0700
From: William Lee Irwin III <wli@...omorphy.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, trond.myklebust@....uio.no, tgraf@...g.ch,
James.Bottomley@...elEye.com, michaelc@...wisc.edu,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, phillips@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/40] Swap over Networked storage -v12
On Fri, 04 May 2007 12:26:51 +0200, Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl> wrote:
>>> There is a fundamental deadlock associated with paging;
On Fri, May 04, 2007 at 12:27:16PM -0700, David Miller wrote:
>> I know you'd really like people like myself to review this work, but a
>> set of 40 patches is just too much to try and digest at once
>> especially when I have other things going on. When I have lots of
>> other things already on my plate, when I see a huge patch set like
>> this I have to just say "delete" because I don't kid myself since
>> I know I'll never get to it.
>> Sorry there's now way I can review this with my current workload.
On Sat, May 05, 2007 at 10:43:00AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> There also quite alot of only semi-related thing in there. It would
> be much better to only do the network stack and iscsi parts first
> and leave nfs out for a while. Especially as the former are definitively
> useful while I strongly doubt that for swap over nfs.
This is backward. As much as we hate it, the common case is swap over
nfs, essentially because that is/was how things were commonly set up
for other operating systems. I'm not a Solaris administrator, though,
so various disclaimers apply.
-- wli
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists