From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] x86: add a is_e820_ram() helper Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2015 11:28:10 +0100 Message-ID: <20150326102810.GB19907@gmail.com> References: <1427358764-6126-1-git-send-email-hch@lst.de> <1427358764-6126-3-git-send-email-hch@lst.de> <20150326090215.GA11520@gmail.com> <20150326093424.GA28217@lst.de> <20150326100413.GA19739@gmail.com> <20150326101923.GA29148@lst.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: linux-nvdimm@ml01.01.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, ross.zwisler@linux.intel.com, axboe@kernel.dk, boaz@plexistor.com To: Christoph Hellwig Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150326101923.GA29148@lst.de> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org * Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 11:04:13AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > Yeah, the code is much clearer now: > > > > Acked-by: Ingo Molnar > > > > What tree is this intended for? Should I pick up the x86 bits? > > The x86 bits really need to go through the x86 tree. The pmem > driver itself would normally go through the block tree, but if Jens > is fine with it sending it through the x86 tree as well would allow > us to have a single complete tree for testing. btw., there's half a dozen block drivers in arch/* platform code, so in theory even the block driver could be merged there - but I agree that it's much cleaner and more generic in drivers/block/. Jens? Thanks, Ingo