Fwd: Re: Fwd: Re: kmem-pool-uvm

[Lars Heidieker <lars%heidieker.de@localhost>]

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: kmem-pool-uvm
Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2012 19:22:31 +0100
From: Lars Heidieker <lars%heidieker.de@localhost>
To: Stephen Borrill <sborrill%NetBSD.org@localhost>
CC: Martin Husemann <martin%duskware.de@localhost>, Jeff Rizzo 
<riz%NetBSD.org@localhost>,
 releng%NetBSD.org@localhost, Mindaugas Rasiukevicius 
<rmind%NetBSD.org@localhost>

On 01/26/2012 09:30 AM, Stephen Borrill wrote:
> On 25/01/2012 20:54, Martin Husemann wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 10:40:14AM -0800, Jeff Rizzo wrote:
>>> I think this is OK to go in for 6.  (ack 1, nak0)
>> 
>> This should either work or fail spectacularily obvious/quickly 
>> when tested on other archs, so assuming we could back it out in 
>> emergency quickly before the branch is cut, it should go in the 
>> quicker the better, IMHO.
>> 
>> (ack 2, nak 0)
> 
> (ack 3, nak 0)
> 
> Go for it
> 

Ok, going to checkin... shortly