From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail191.messagelabs.com (mail191.messagelabs.com [216.82.242.19]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD0198D0039 for ; Wed, 2 Feb 2011 14:38:00 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2011 11:37:50 -0800 From: Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] Allow GUP to fail instead of waiting on a page. Message-Id: <20110202113750.367a6fda.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20110202133157.GI14984@redhat.com> References: <1296559307-14637-1-git-send-email-gleb@redhat.com> <1296559307-14637-2-git-send-email-gleb@redhat.com> <20110201164240.9a5c06e9.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20110202133157.GI14984@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Gleb Natapov Cc: avi@redhat.com, mtosatti@redhat.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Linus Torvalds , Rik van Riel , Hugh Dickins On Wed, 2 Feb 2011 15:31:57 +0200 Gleb Natapov wrote: > > This? > > > Yes, this is better. Thanks you. I see that the patch below is in your queue > already. Should I re-spin my patch with improved comment anyway? Nope, that's OK - I fold fixup patches into the base patch before sending them onwards. There's always a risk that someone will get a hold of an earlier version of the patch, but a) sending out a v2 doesn't eliminate that risk and b) it's not very important anyway (in this case) and c) because I separate the base patch from the fixup patches, I'll easily notice if someone merges an earlier patch, because I'm left holding stray fixup patches. -- 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/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org