From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: LMB bits Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2010 09:45:18 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <20100713.094518.133409593.davem@davemloft.net> References: <20100712.153455.108790468.davem@davemloft.net> <1279005164.28659.407.camel@pasglop> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from 74-93-104-97-Washington.hfc.comcastbusiness.net ([74.93.104.97]:36544 "EHLO sunset.davemloft.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756958Ab0GMQpE (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Jul 2010 12:45:04 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: torvalds@linux-foundation.org Cc: benh@kernel.crashing.org, yinghai@kernel.org, mingo@elte.hu, hpa@zytor.com, tglx@linutronix.de, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org From: Linus Torvalds Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2010 08:11:57 -0700 > On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 12:12 AM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt > wrote: >> >> Ingo, Linus, how to you want to proceed ? We could get the rename patch >> in now, that would make things easier for the ARM folks who have started >> using LMB as well and are currently clashing in linux-next, and keep the >> rest of the rework for the merge window ? Or keep the whole thing for >> the merge window ? > > If it's just a rename, and the accidental lmb renames have been all > sorted out, then I'm ok with taking a pure rename that changes nothing > else now, just to make things easier to merge later. I'd also be real happy if we did this now too.