Re: 2.4.19pre1aa1

[Marco Colombo]

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.