All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Stefan Bader <stefan.bader@canonical.com>,
	Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>,
	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,
	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
	Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
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
Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2011 16:56:47 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20111205155647.GG28866@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20111130114128.ad9c79be.akpm@linux-foundation.org>


* Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:

> On Wed, 30 Nov 2011 12:02:49 +0100 Stefan Bader <stefan.bader@canonical.com> wrote:
> 
> > So, as of today, this seems to be back on the master branch of linux-next (I
> > guess from Andrew putting it back, but I am never sure with linux-next). But I
> > am not sure how/when this would go into Linus tree. I assume without any
> > specific action maybe merge window for 3.3...
> > We got some positive feedback on it from users running into the problem. So it
> > seems like a valuable change. From the discusions so far I take that technically
> > the change did not trigger resistance. For that reason I wanted to ask whether
> > there is a chance that this looks important enough to be pushed before the next
> > merge window...
> 
> I sent this patch to the x86 maintainers two weeks ago.  It 
> was ignored, as were the other 11 patches I sent.  Later I 
> will resend them all.  If they are again ignored I will later 
> send them yet again, and so on.

they are still sitting in my mbox - working down the backlog 
now.

Thanks,

	Ingo

      reply	other threads:[~2011-12-05 15:58 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-10-14 19:51 [merged] x86-paravirt-pte-updates-in-kunmap_atomic-need-to-be-synchronous-regardless-of-lazy_mmu-mode.patch removed from -mm tree akpm
2011-10-25 18:24 ` Not really merged? " Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2011-10-27 22:53   ` Andrew Morton
2011-10-28  7:08     ` Ingo Molnar
2011-10-28  7:39       ` Andrew Morton
2011-10-28  7:48         ` [Xen tree maintenance] " Ingo Molnar
2011-10-28 13:59           ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2011-10-28 14:33         ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2011-11-30 11:02         ` Stefan Bader
2011-11-30 19:41           ` Andrew Morton
2011-12-05 15:56             ` Ingo Molnar [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20111205155647.GG28866@elte.hu \
    --to=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=jeremy.fitzhardinge@citrix.com \
    --cc=konrad.wilk@oracle.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
    --cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
    --cc=stable@kernel.org \
    --cc=stefan.bader@canonical.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.