From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755258Ab1J0XC4 (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Oct 2011 19:02:56 -0400 Received: from mail.linuxfoundation.org ([140.211.169.12]:50449 "EHLO mail.linuxfoundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752902Ab1J0XCz (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Oct 2011 19:02:55 -0400 X-Greylist: delayed 563 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Thu, 27 Oct 2011 19:02:55 EDT Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2011 15:53:29 -0700 From: Andrew Morton To: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl, hpa@zytor.com, jeremy.fitzhardinge@citrix.com, mingo@redhat.com, stable@kernel.org, tglx@linutronix.de Subject: Re: Not really merged? Re: [merged] x86-paravirt-pte-updates-in-kunmap_atomic-need-to-be-synchronous-regardless-of-lazy_mmu-mode.patch removed from -mm tree Message-Id: <20111027155329.0adc1358.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20111025182450.GA9843@phenom.dumpdata.com> References: <201110141951.p9EJpn3A006989@hpaq5.eem.corp.google.com> <20111025182450.GA9843@phenom.dumpdata.com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.0.2 (GTK+ 2.20.1; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 25 Oct 2011 14:24:50 -0400 Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 12:51:48PM -0700, akpm@google.com wrote: > > > > The patch titled > > Subject: x86/paravirt: PTE updates in k(un)map_atomic need to be synchronous, regardless of lazy_mmu mode > > has been removed from the -mm tree. Its filename was > > x86-paravirt-pte-updates-in-kunmap_atomic-need-to-be-synchronous-regardless-of-lazy_mmu-mode.patch > > > > This patch was dropped because it was merged into mainline or a subsystem tree > > Hey Andrew, > > I am actually not seeing this in mainline? Was it accidently dropped out of your tree? hm, well spotted. I'm not sure what happened here - possibly the patch was merged into an x86 tree (and hence linux-next) but later got lost. Or possibly not, and I just screwed up. Either way, it's a pretty important patch - we marked it for -stable backporting. > If that is the case I can convience you to put it back in or can I drive it to Linus with > your Ack-ed by? I resurrected my copy and shall send it along to the x86 guys soon.