From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81984C433EF for ; Thu, 30 Sep 2021 22:11:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [112.213.38.117]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BF2DF60F4B for ; Thu, 30 Sep 2021 22:11:34 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 mail.kernel.org BF2DF60F4B Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lists.ozlabs.org Received: from boromir.ozlabs.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4HL6sJ6xMqz3bW7 for ; Fri, 1 Oct 2021 08:11:32 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=k20201202 header.b=VMFkm4a+; dkim-atps=neutral Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=kernel.org (client-ip=198.145.29.99; helo=mail.kernel.org; envelope-from=rppt@kernel.org; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=k20201202 header.b=VMFkm4a+; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4HL6rW0X0jz2xrm for ; Fri, 1 Oct 2021 08:10:50 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 965D361390; Thu, 30 Sep 2021 22:10:47 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1633039847; bh=IwzBemW+hy1M1ewr7atFO0cSMjKx7nF1iOUj3EQWXE8=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=VMFkm4a+fgdg4zYaCkaWnSOTeOZ8uAbKkitUxM0+m4BBfXT2b5oLMM7rDTLawyLAE NhhBOznSRQz5yRbiTNsvbV6E0IU3T5qz407KpFRCdUtW5hyDqK4d2pDAOMg4JRadt6 KWrjYIXEm0KrNBVtP+JPzhB2VrG3+5vrqbM5hiSfUBy+07gwCIoejO0uW/sH7DYI6V pgwC0QydyQR/hM9nqnvQyR6gIiVBVoszYMQd2xY8yoPecdNAhtt2AC8GtVh+C0O4VI bPLArmwwdAbQbiLreQFVTZM6xuVy7lVHSRkS66W+8O7Twsm9hTlzsCUC2ioP79rEse MlAOzYU2R7N3A== Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2021 15:10:46 -0700 From: Mike Rapoport To: Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/6] memblock: cleanup memblock_free interface Message-ID: References: <20210930185031.18648-1-rppt@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: linux-efi , KVM list , Linux-sh list , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linux-MM , kasan-dev , linux-sparc , linux-riscv , linux-s390 , Mike Rapoport , xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, "open list:SYNOPSYS ARC ARCHITECTURE" , devicetree , linux-um , Shahab Vahedi , Linux ARM , Juergen Gross , linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, "open list:BROADCOM NVRAM DRIVER" , iommu , alpha , Andrew Morton , linuxppc-dev Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" On Thu, Sep 30, 2021 at 02:20:33PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Thu, Sep 30, 2021 at 11:50 AM Mike Rapoport wrote: > > > > The first patch is a cleanup of numa_distance allocation in arch_numa I've > > spotted during the conversion. > > The second patch is a fix for Xen memory freeing on some of the error > > paths. > > Well, at least patch 2 looks like something that should go into 5.15 > and be marked for stable. > > Patch 1 looks like a trivial local cleanup, and could go in > immediately. Patch 4 might be in that same category. > > The rest look like "next merge window" to me, since they are spread > out and neither bugfixes nor tiny localized cleanups (iow renaming > functions, global resulting search-and-replace things). > > So my gut feel is that two (maybe three) of these patches should go in > asap, with three (maybe four) be left for 5.16. > > IOW, not trat this as a single series. > > Hmm? Yes, why not :) I'd keep patch 4 for the next merge window, does not look urgent to me. Andrew, can you please take care of this or you'd prefer me resending everything separately? > Linus -- Sincerely yours, Mike.