| |||||||||||||
In the cycle towards 2.6.16In the cycle towards 2.6.16Posted Mar 9, 2006 16:36 UTC (Thu) by AnswerGuy (guest, #1256)In reply to: RCU and open file accounting by swiftone Parent article: RCU and open file accounting
... I have to suspect that Jon was speaking to the upcoming 2.6.16 release.
There's been a concerted effort to keep the larger patches in the early builds so it would have been more appropriate for a 2.6.15.{1,2,3} ... and not for 2.6.16-rc6 ... for example.
Anyway, it could wait until 2.6.16.1 ... there aren't that many users with hundreds of CPUs and over 10GiB of RAM that need to worry about make -j8192 running out of steam.
JimD
(Log in to post comments)
In the cycle towards 2.6.16 Posted Mar 9, 2006 17:36 UTC (Thu) by madscientist (subscriber, #16861) [Link] I'm quite confident that there's no way a patch like this would ever be considered for a bugfix release like 2.6.16.1. It's far too big and intrusive, and, honestly, not severe enough to justify the risk.
It'll either squeek into 2.6.16, or be deferred until 2.6.17.
In the cycle towards 2.6.16 Posted Mar 9, 2006 19:05 UTC (Thu) by PaulMcKenney (subscriber, #9624) [Link] Looks to me like it actually did go into the 2.6.16 stream.
|
|||||||||||||