From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: m.szyprowski@samsung.com (Marek Szyprowski) Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2012 14:22:55 +0200 Subject: [PATCHv24 00/16] Contiguous Memory Allocator In-Reply-To: <20120419124044.632bfa49.akpm@linux-foundation.org> References: <1333462221-3987-1-git-send-email-m.szyprowski@samsung.com> <20120419124044.632bfa49.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Message-ID: <03b201cd1ef0$50ca9350$f25fb9f0$%szyprowski@samsung.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Hi Andrew, On Thursday, April 19, 2012 9:41 PM Andrew Morton wrote: > On Tue, 03 Apr 2012 16:10:05 +0200 > Marek Szyprowski wrote: > > > This is (yet another) update of CMA patches. > > Looks OK to me. It's a lot of code. > > Please move it into linux-next, and if all is well, ask Linus to pull > the tree into 3.5-rc1. Please be sure to cc me on that email. Ok, thanks! Is it possible to get your acked-by or reviewed-by tag? It might help a bit to get the pull request accepted by Linus. :) > I suggest that you include additional patches which enable CMA as much > as possible on as many architectures as possible so that it gets > maximum coverage testing in linux-next. Remove those Kconfig patches > when merging upstream. > > All this code will probably mess up my tree, but I'll work that out. > It would be more awkward if the CMA code were to later disappear from > linux-next or were not merged into 3.5-rc1. Let's avoid that. I've put the patches on my dma-mapping-next branch and we will see the result (and/or complaints) on Monday. Best regards -- Marek Szyprowski Samsung Poland R&D Center