On Thu, 2013-07-25 at 09:19 +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > On 24-07-13 14:58, Ben Hutchings wrote: > > On Wed, 2013-07-24 at 12:06 +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > >> On 24-07-13 04:10, Ben Hutchings wrote: > >>>>>> +CONFIG_NFS_SWAP=y > >>> > >>> Really? > >> > >> It _should_ be safe since the PF_MEMALLOC patches were accepted > >> (3.6-rc1, commit 7f338fe4540b and friends). Haven't tested it myself > >> yet, though. > >> > >> (and yes, I would say that swap over NBD will produce less overhead and > >> is therefore a better idea ;-) > > > > Yes, but why should this be m68k-specific? > > I suppose that's a fair question, but I do wonder why you're asking me, > as this is more your area. > > I understood your above-quoted reply as meaning you thought it a bad > idea. If that's not what you meant, I don't have much else to say, really. I'm not saying a bad idea. But if it's a useful and stable feature now, then I think it should be enabled for all architectures - as a separate change from the m68k config update. Ben. -- Ben Hutchings Once a job is fouled up, anything done to improve it makes it worse.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part