Daisuke Nishimura wrote:
> On 2008/05/27 22:18 +0900, Balbir Singh wrote:
>> Daisuke Nishimura wrote:
>>> On 2008/05/27 16:42 +0900, Balbir Singh wrote:
>>>> YAMAMOTO Takashi wrote:
>>>>> hi,
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks for looking into this. Yamamoto-San is also looking into a swap
>>>>>>> controller. Is there a consensus on the approach?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Not yet, but I think we should have some consensus each other
>>>>>> before going further.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> Daisuke Nishimura.
>>>>> while nishimura-san's one still seems to have a lot of todo,
>>>>> it seems good enough as a start point to me.
>>>>> so i'd like to withdraw mine.
>>>>>
>>>>> nishimura-san, is it ok for you?
>>>>>
>>> Of cource.
>>> I'll work hard to make it better.
>>>
>>>> I would suggest that me merge the good parts from both into the swap controller.
>>>> Having said that I'll let the two of you decide on what the good aspects of both
>>>> are. I cannot see any immediate overlap, but there might be some w.r.t.
>>>> infrastructure used.
>>>>
>>> Well, you mean you'll make another patch based on yamamoto-san's
>>> and mine?
>>>
>>> Basically, I think it's difficult to merge
>>> because we charge different objects.
>>>
>> Yes, I know - that's why I said infrastructure, to see the grouping and common
>> data structure aspects. I'll try and review the code.
>>
> OK.
> 
> I'll wait for your patch.

Hi, Daisuke-San

I am not sending out any patch (sorry for the confusion, if I caused it). I am
going to review the swapcgroup patchset.

-- 
	Warm Regards,
	Balbir Singh
	Linux Technology Center
	IBM, ISTL
_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
Containers@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers

On 2008/05/27 22:46 +0900, Balbir Singh wrote:
> Daisuke Nishimura wrote:
>> On 2008/05/27 22:18 +0900, Balbir Singh wrote:
>>> Daisuke Nishimura wrote:
>>>> On 2008/05/27 16:42 +0900, Balbir Singh wrote:
>>>>> YAMAMOTO Takashi wrote:
>>>>>> hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks for looking into this. Yamamoto-San is also looking into a swap
>>>>>>>> controller. Is there a consensus on the approach?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Not yet, but I think we should have some consensus each other
>>>>>>> before going further.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>> Daisuke Nishimura.
>>>>>> while nishimura-san's one still seems to have a lot of todo,
>>>>>> it seems good enough as a start point to me.
>>>>>> so i'd like to withdraw mine.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> nishimura-san, is it ok for you?
>>>>>>
>>>> Of cource.
>>>> I'll work hard to make it better.
>>>>
>>>>> I would suggest that me merge the good parts from both into the swap controller.
>>>>> Having said that I'll let the two of you decide on what the good aspects of both
>>>>> are. I cannot see any immediate overlap, but there might be some w.r.t.
>>>>> infrastructure used.
>>>>>
>>>> Well, you mean you'll make another patch based on yamamoto-san's
>>>> and mine?
>>>>
>>>> Basically, I think it's difficult to merge
>>>> because we charge different objects.
>>>>
>>> Yes, I know - that's why I said infrastructure, to see the grouping and common
>>> data structure aspects. I'll try and review the code.
>>>
>> OK.
>>
>> I'll wait for your patch.
> 
> Hi, Daisuke-San
> 
> I am not sending out any patch (sorry for the confusion, if I caused it). I am
> going to review the swapcgroup patchset.
> 

No problem :-)

I would very appreciate it if you review swap cgroup patches.

I'll update my patches based on your and others' comments.


Thanks,
Daisuke Nishimura.

_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
Containers@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers