-------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: kmem-pool-uvm Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2012 19:22:31 +0100 From: Lars Heidieker <[email protected]> To: Stephen Borrill <[email protected]> CC: Martin Husemann <[email protected]>, Jeff Rizzo <[email protected]>, [email protected], Mindaugas Rasiukevicius <[email protected]>
On 01/26/2012 09:30 AM, Stephen Borrill wrote: > On 25/01/2012 20:54, Martin Husemann wrote: >> On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 10:40:14AM -0800, Jeff Rizzo wrote: >>> I think this is OK to go in for 6. (ack 1, nak0) >> >> This should either work or fail spectacularily obvious/quickly >> when tested on other archs, so assuming we could back it out in >> emergency quickly before the branch is cut, it should go in the >> quicker the better, IMHO. >> >> (ack 2, nak 0) > > (ack 3, nak 0) > > Go for it > Ok, going to checkin... shortly
