From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932486Ab1LEP6l (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Dec 2011 10:58:41 -0500 Received: from mx3.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.1.138]:37671 "EHLO mx3.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932411Ab1LEP6j (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Dec 2011 10:58:39 -0500 Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2011 16:56:47 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar To: Andrew Morton Cc: Stefan Bader , Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk , 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 , Rusty Russell 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: <20111205155647.GG28866@elte.hu> References: <201110141951.p9EJpn3A006989@hpaq5.eem.corp.google.com> <20111025182450.GA9843@phenom.dumpdata.com> <20111027155329.0adc1358.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20111028070838.GG12995@elte.hu> <20111028003935.a75d16b6.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <4ED60D59.6080308@canonical.com> <20111130114128.ad9c79be.akpm@linux-foundation.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20111130114128.ad9c79be.akpm@linux-foundation.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-ELTE-SpamScore: -2.0 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-2.0 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.3.1 -2.0 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Andrew Morton wrote: > On Wed, 30 Nov 2011 12:02:49 +0100 Stefan Bader 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