From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johannes Weiner Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/20] mm: generic show_mem() v4 Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2008 09:54:11 +0200 Message-ID: <87iqvq59b0.fsf@skyscraper.fehenstaub.lan> References: <20080627115349.743368154@saeurebad.de> <8763rq6qlc.fsf@skyscraper.fehenstaub.lan> <20080701002518.7918fdaf.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from saeurebad.de ([85.214.36.134]:51269 "EHLO saeurebad.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752970AbYGAHys (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Jul 2008 03:54:48 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20080701002518.7918fdaf.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (Andrew Morton's message of "Tue, 1 Jul 2008 00:25:18 -0700") Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Andrew Morton Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org Hi, Andrew Morton writes: > On Tue, 01 Jul 2008 08:55:27 +0200 Johannes Weiner wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Johannes Weiner writes: >> >> > Every arch implements its own show_mem() function. Most of them share >> > quite some code, some of them are completely identical. >> > >> > This series implements a generic version of this function and migrates >> > almost all architectures to it. >> > >> > version 4: >> > - rebased against -mmotm >> >> Oh, btw, do you even want them, Andrew? > > These are only a few hundred patches ahead of my current backlog cursor > :( I should be caught up mid-weekish. > >> Or should I base this set on >> Linus' tree directly? > > That would be a bad step. Linus's tree is 2.6.26 whereas we're all > developing 2.6.27. There's a ~30MB diff between the two. Alright, I will keep them against -mmotm and resend them soon without the Kconfig stuff as suggested by Paul Mundt. Hannes