From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753815AbXLEL2U (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Dec 2007 06:28:20 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751797AbXLEL2N (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Dec 2007 06:28:13 -0500 Received: from mx2.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.151.9]:40032 "EHLO mx2.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751556AbXLEL2M (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Dec 2007 06:28:12 -0500 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2007 12:27:58 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar To: Joerg Roedel Cc: tglx@linutronix.de, hpa@zytor.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] x86_64: define all _PAGE_* in terms of _PAGE_BIT_* Message-ID: <20071205112758.GA6143@elte.hu> References: <11966016811565-git-send-email-joerg.roedel@amd.com> <11966016814058-git-send-email-joerg.roedel@amd.com> <20071204123809.GD27286@elte.hu> <20071204150652.GJ6945@amd.com> <20071204210751.GH32018@elte.hu> <20071205105236.GB23093@amd.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20071205105236.GB23093@amd.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) X-ELTE-VirusStatus: clean X-ELTE-SpamScore: -1.5 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-1.5 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.2.3 -1.5 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Joerg Roedel wrote: > > > > please run patches through scripts/checkpatch.pl, it gives: > > > > > > > > total: 10 errors, 0 warnings, 42 lines checked > > > > > > > > (please send a followup cleanup patch - i picked up your series and this > > > > is a minor cleanliness issue) > > > > > > Sorry, forgot to check the patches before submission. Will cleanup and > > > resubmit soon. > > > > please if possible send a delta against x86.git, not a replacement > > patch. It's easier for the patchflow. > > Not sure I understand you right here. Do you mean a patch on top of my > previous patches? yeah - that's easier to pick up for me (because i've already got your series applied), and it's also easier for you as well. It also makes sense to generally split style fixes from substantial patches. (in the cases where there are pre-existing style problems in the code) Ingo