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 0F8466B01EF for ; Sun, 18 Apr 2010 04:32:26 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <4BCA7A26.9040208@kernel.org> Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2010 12:19:02 +0900 From: Tejun Heo MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] Numa: Use Generic Per-cpu Variables for numa_*_id() References: <20100415172950.8801.60358.sendpatchset@localhost.localdomain> In-Reply-To: <20100415172950.8801.60358.sendpatchset@localhost.localdomain> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Lee Schermerhorn Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-numa@vger.kernel.org, Mel Gorman , Andi@domain.invalid, Kleen@domain.invalid, andi@firstfloor.org, Christoph Lameter , Nick Piggin , David Rientjes , eric.whitney@hp.com, Andrew Morton , KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki List-ID: On 04/16/2010 02:29 AM, Lee Schermerhorn wrote: > Use Generic Per cpu infrastructure for numa_*_id() V4 > > Series Against: 2.6.34-rc3-mmotm-100405-1609 Other than the minor nitpicks, the patchset looks great to me. Through which tree should this be routed? If no one else is gonna take it, I can route it through percpu after patchset refresh. Thanks. -- tejun -- 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