On Sat, Sep 22, 2012 at 09:13:04AM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 07:53:22PM -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 08:49:30PM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > > > On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 04:02:09PM -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > > > > > > > That sounds "nice", but it seems to be a feature, and doesn't meet the > > > > main requirements of the stable tree. > > > > > > I thought you had said that some features had gone into the stable > > > kernel tree because distro's were shipping them? Or am I > > > misremembering what was discussed at the kernel summit? > > > > The "features" was performance speedups to the scheduler and mm layer. > > They were not new features being added. > > But performance updates aren't bug fixes, either, and do represent > additional risk.
Certainly. Which is why the patches lived in the enterprise distros for a while before I would take them. > I haven't been marking commits which represented > performance/scalability improvements in ext4 because I didn't think > that was in line with the stable kernel rules --- and I because didn't > think you would thank me if I did.... was I wrong? Yes, I will take performance / scalability improvements, if you are willing to help out with any reported problems, like was done with the scheduler stuff. That's what I was trying to say at the kernel summit session about the stable kernel tree, sorry if it wasn't clear. thanks, greg k-h -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
