Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 1 Mar 2002 05:21:24 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 1 Mar 2002 05:19:14 -0500 Received: from Morgoth.esiway.net ([193.194.16.157]:31242 "EHLO Morgoth.esiway.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 1 Mar 2002 05:17:15 -0500 Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 11:17:08 +0100 (CET) From: Marco Colombo To: Bill Davidsen cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: 2.4.19pre1aa1 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 28 Feb 2002, Bill Davidsen wrote: > On Thu, 28 Feb 2002, Mike Fedyk wrote: > > > The problem here is that currently the mainline kernel makes some bad > > dicesions in the VM, and -aa is the solution in this case. When -aa is > > merged, you will still have both solutions; one in mainline, one as a patch > > (rmap). > > > > Linus has already changed the VM once in 2.4, and I don't really see another > > large VM change (rmap in 2.4) happening again. > > > > Rmap looks promising for a 2.5 merge after several issues are overcome > > (pte-highmem, etc). > > I do understand what happens in the VM currently... And as noted I run > both -aa kernels and rmap on different machines. But -aa runs better on > large machines and rmap better on small machines with memory pressure (my > experience), so blessing one and making the other "only a patch" troubles > me somewhat. I hate to say "compete" as VM solution, but they both solve > the same problem with more success in one field or another. 2.4 VM is Andrea's. There's no competition. I see current -aa VM patches just as maintainance, which is performed outside the mainline for good reasons. As soon as Andrea is satisfied with testing, -aa will be integrated into Marcelo's 2.4. This is just part of VM (which admittedly was quite "young" when it was included) maintainance/evolution. OTOH, Red Hat 2.4 kernels are still based on Rik's, AFAIK. I bet they'll be running 2.4-rmap sooner or later. Red Hat has a long history of running kernels with non standard features (RAID 0.90 comes to mind). So maybe there *is* competition, but on the vendor side only. I do hope vanilla 2.4 VM will be -aa forever (but I'll be running RH provided kernels most of the times - I like them). .TM. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/