From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Subject: Re: [PATCH 2.6.24-mm1] Mempolicy: silently restrict nodemask to allowed nodes V3 From: Lee Schermerhorn In-Reply-To: References: <20080205163406.270B.KOSAKI.MOTOHIRO@jp.fujitsu.com> <1202499913.5346.60.camel@localhost> <20080210141154.25E7.KOSAKI.MOTOHIRO@jp.fujitsu.com> <20080210054953.GA10371@kroah.com> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2008 11:47:39 -0500 Message-Id: <1202748459.5014.50.camel@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: KOSAKI Motohiro Cc: Linus Torvalds , Greg KH , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton , Christoph Lameter , Paul Jackson , David Rientjes , Mel Gorman , linux-mm , Eric Whitney List-ID: On Sat, 2008-02-09 at 23:42 -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > On Sat, 9 Feb 2008, Greg KH wrote: > > > > Once the patch goes into Linus's tree, feel free to send it to the > > stable@kernel.org address so that we can include it in the 2.6.24.x > > tree. > > I've been ignoring the patches because they say "PATCH 2.6.24-mm1", and so > I simply don't know whether it's supposed to go into *my* kernel or just > -mm. > > There's also been several versions and discussions, so I'd really like to > have somebody send me a final patch with all the acks etc.. One that is > clearly for me, not for -mm. > Kosaki-san: You've tested V3 on '.24. Do you want to repost the patch refreshed against .24, adding your "Tested-by:" [and "Signed-off-by:", as the folding of the contextualization into mpol_check_policy() is based on your code--apologies for not adding it myself]? I'm tied up with something else for most of this week and won't get to it until Friday, earliest. Regards, Lee P.S., As Andrew pointed out, I forgot to run checkpatch and the patch does include a violation thereof. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org