From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dan Carpenter Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] ide: replace GFP_ATOMIC by GFP_KERNEL Date: Thu, 9 Apr 2015 17:40:36 +0300 Message-ID: <20150409144036.GB16501@mwanda> References: <1428579988-10167-1-git-send-email-lambert.quentin@gmail.com> <1428579988-10167-3-git-send-email-lambert.quentin@gmail.com> <20150409123633.GN10964@mwanda> <55268DCB.3010201@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from aserp1040.oracle.com ([141.146.126.69]:24166 "EHLO aserp1040.oracle.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751805AbbDIOkw (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Apr 2015 10:40:52 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <55268DCB.3010201@gmail.com> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Quentin Lambert Cc: "David S. Miller" , linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Apr 09, 2015 at 04:33:47PM +0200, Quentin Lambert wrote: > > > On 09/04/2015 14:36, Dan Carpenter wrote: > >Oh. They're not GFP_ATOMIC. > > > >Fold these two patches together into one patch and resend. > The reason I did it that way is because I feel that the two patches > really are different. > The first one do not change the execution of the code but the second > one does. > Could you explain to me why they can be folded into one ? When I read the first patch it left me with unanswered questions and I was planning to ask you to redo it. After you had fixed 1/1 there is no need for 2/2. regards, dan carpenter