On Mon, Mar 26, 2007 at 09:33:10AM -0400, Ravi Pratap wrote:
> > >> Thanks so much! Will this go into 2.6.15 by any chance?
> > >
> > > I don't recall that there every has been such a kernel release ;-)
> > >
> > > But seriously, 2.6.15 is as dead as Tutankhamun.
> > Some chip vendors only support that version, so I am assuming
> > that that was the reason for the question.
> That's correct, actually :-)
> > It is a classic case of what happens when people do ports
> > that are not merged. They say it is good enough as is and
> > then never move forward or fix bugs.
> True, and I don't know why these vendors do it. I wish too that they
Talk to them. Be prepared to reiterate.
> > The good news I guess is that we have the source, so we could
> > forward port it if we were really motivated.
> Yes, but isn't it a lot of work considering the lack of a
> flush_anon_page in 2.6.15?
David wrote about forward porting the patches in your vendor kernel
to a more modern kernel. That would require some work but the
flush_anon_page() thing would be the least of your worries.
Otherwise, you'd need to backport the about following changesets into
your kernel to get flush_anon_page: