From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrea Arcangeli Subject: Re: [PATCH 01 of 12] Core of mmu notifiers Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2008 19:24:32 +0200 Message-ID: <20080423172432.GE24536@duo.random> References: <20080422223545.GP24536@duo.random> <20080423162629.GB24536@duo.random> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Nick Piggin , Jack Steiner , Peter Zijlstra , kvm-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, Kanoj Sarcar , Roland Dreier , Steve Wise , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Avi Kivity , linux-mm@kvack.org, Robin Holt , general@lists.openfabrics.org, Hugh Dickins , akpm@linux-foundation.org, Rusty Russell To: Christoph Lameter Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080423162629.GB24536@duo.random> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 06:26:29PM +0200, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 04:20:35PM -0700, Christoph Lameter wrote: > > I guess I have to prepare another patchset then? Apologies for my previous not too polite comment in answer to the above, but I thought this double patchset was over now that you converged in #v12 and obsoleted EMM and after the last private discussions. There's nothing personal here on my side, just a bit of general frustration on this matter. I appreciate all great contribution from you, as last your idea to use sort(), but I can't really see any possible benefit or justification anymore from keeping two patchsets floating around given we already converged on the mmu-notifier-core, and given it's almost certain mmu-notifier-core will go in -mm in time for 2.6.26. Let's put it this way, if I fail to merge mmu-notifier-core into 2.6.26 I'll voluntarily give up my entire patchset and leave maintainership to you so you move 1/N to N/N and remove mm_lock-sem patch (everything else can remain the same as it's all orthogonal so changing the order is a matter of minutes).