From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sun, 16 Sep 2001 19:13:43 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sun, 16 Sep 2001 19:13:24 -0400 Received: from ns.virtualhost.dk ([195.184.98.160]:50958 "EHLO virtualhost.dk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sun, 16 Sep 2001 19:13:04 -0400 Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2001 01:13:23 +0200 From: Jens Axboe To: Alan Cox Cc: Linus Torvalds , Linux Kernel , arjanv@redhat.com, "David S. Miller" Subject: Re: [patch] block highmem zero bounce v14 Message-ID: <20010917011323.B12955@suse.de> In-Reply-To: <20010917000012.B12270@suse.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Sep 17 2001, Alan Cox wrote: > > Most of it is really a cautious back port of the 2.5 stuff I've been > > working on, and with the above considerations it is/was meant as a 2.4 > > thing :-) > > So better deferred until 2.5, tried in 2.5 and backported to 2.4 IMHO Maybe. At least the first thing I would like is for the pci64 patch to be merged in 2.4. That should be very doable without risking breakage. When that is done it's easier to see what the block-highmem patch does. And I believe that we _can_ merge it in 2.4 without a 2.5 trial, it's really not that intrusive. -- Jens Axboe