From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1755660Ab2EHHAR (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Tue, 8 May 2012 03:00:17 -0400
Received: from mail-pz0-f46.google.com ([209.85.210.46]:42617 "EHLO
	mail-pz0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1755399Ab2EHG7z (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 8 May 2012 02:59:55 -0400
Date: Mon, 7 May 2012 23:58:29 -0700
From: Anton Vorontsov <anton.vorontsov@linaro.org>
To: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@gmail.com>
Cc: Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>, Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>,
        Leonid Moiseichuk <leonid.moiseichuk@nokia.com>,
        John Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org>, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org,
        patches@linaro.org, kernel-team@android.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] vmevent: Implement special low-memory attribute
Message-ID: <20120508065829.GA13357@lizard>
References: <20120501132409.GA22894@lizard>
 <20120501132620.GC24226@lizard>
 <4FA35A85.4070804@kernel.org>
 <20120504073810.GA25175@lizard>
 <CAOJsxLH_7mMMe+2DvUxBW1i5nbUfkbfRE3iEhLQV9F_MM7=eiw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHGf_=qcGfuG1g15SdE0SDxiuhCyVN025pQB+sQNuNba4Q4jcA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20120507121527.GA19526@lizard>
 <4FA82056.2070706@gmail.com>
 <CAOJsxLHQcDZSHJZg+zbptqmT9YY0VTkPd+gG_zgMzs+HaV_cyA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHGf_=q1nbu=3cnfJ4qXwmngMPB-539kg-DFN2FJGig8+dRaNw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAHGf_=q1nbu=3cnfJ4qXwmngMPB-539kg-DFN2FJGig8+dRaNw@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 01:42:05AM -0400, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
[...]
> > Well, yeah, if we are to report _number of pages_, the numbers better
> > be meaningful.
> >
> > That said, I think you are being unfair to Anton who's one of the few
> > that's actually taking the time to implement this properly instead of
> > settling for an out-of-tree hack.
> 
> Unfair? But only I can talk about technical comment. To be honest, I
> really dislike
> I need say the same explanation again and again. A lot of people don't read
> past discussion. And as far as the patches take the same mistake, I must say
> the same thing. It is just PITA.

Note that just telling people that something is PITA doesn't help solve
things (so people will come back to you with stupid questions over and
over again). You can call people morons, idiots and dumbasses (that's
all fine) but still finding a way to be productive. :-)

You could just give a link to a previous discussion, in which you think
you explained all your concerns regarding cache handling issues, or
memory notifications/statistics in general.

So, feel free to call me an idiot, but please expand your points a
little bit or give a link to the discussion you're referring to?

Thanks,

-- 
Anton Vorontsov
Email: cbouatmailru@gmail.com