From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH] mm: Pass virtual address to [__]p{te,ud,md}_free_tlb() Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2009 17:11:13 +1000 Message-ID: <1248073873.13067.31.camel@pasglop> References: <20090715074952.A36C7DDDB2@ozlabs.org> <20090715135620.GD7298@wotan.suse.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20090715135620.GD7298@wotan.suse.de> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Nick Piggin Cc: Linux Memory Management , Linux-Arch , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, Hugh Dickins , Linus Torvalds List-Id: linux-arch.vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2009-07-15 at 15:56 +0200, Nick Piggin wrote: > > I would like to merge the new support that depends on this in 2.6.32, > > so unless there's major objections, I'd like this to go in early during > > the merge window. We can sort out separately how to carry the patch > > around in -next until then since the powerpc tree will have a dependency > > on it. > > Can't see any problem with that. CC'ing Linus here. How do you want to proceed with that merge ? (IE. so far nobody objected to the patch itself) IE. The patch affects all archs, though it's a trivial change every time, but I'll have stuff in powerpc-next that depends on it, and so I'm not sure what the right approach is here. Should I put it in the powerpc tree ? I also didn't have any formal Ack from anybody, neither mm folks nor arch maintainers :-) Cheers, Ben. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate.crashing.org ([63.228.1.57]:37101 "EHLO gate.crashing.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751491AbZGTHLg (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Jul 2009 03:11:36 -0400 Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH] mm: Pass virtual address to [__]p{te,ud,md}_free_tlb() From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt In-Reply-To: <20090715135620.GD7298@wotan.suse.de> References: <20090715074952.A36C7DDDB2@ozlabs.org> <20090715135620.GD7298@wotan.suse.de> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2009 17:11:13 +1000 Message-ID: <1248073873.13067.31.camel@pasglop> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Nick Piggin Cc: Linux Memory Management , Linux-Arch , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, Hugh Dickins , Linus Torvalds Message-ID: <20090720071113.tbKnws6ZdtM9-2ebVYTvMqj9yFnPgzr2jmlBdv4e4JE@z> On Wed, 2009-07-15 at 15:56 +0200, Nick Piggin wrote: > > I would like to merge the new support that depends on this in 2.6.32, > > so unless there's major objections, I'd like this to go in early during > > the merge window. We can sort out separately how to carry the patch > > around in -next until then since the powerpc tree will have a dependency > > on it. > > Can't see any problem with that. CC'ing Linus here. How do you want to proceed with that merge ? (IE. so far nobody objected to the patch itself) IE. The patch affects all archs, though it's a trivial change every time, but I'll have stuff in powerpc-next that depends on it, and so I'm not sure what the right approach is here. Should I put it in the powerpc tree ? I also didn't have any formal Ack from anybody, neither mm folks nor arch maintainers :-) Cheers, Ben.