From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1761308AbZEAPfb (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 May 2009 11:35:31 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753373AbZEAPfU (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 May 2009 11:35:20 -0400 Received: from mx2.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.151.9]:37197 "EHLO mx2.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755527AbZEAPfS (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 May 2009 11:35:18 -0400 Date: Fri, 1 May 2009 17:34:34 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: Sam Ravnborg Cc: Tim Abbott , Linux kernel mailing list , Anders Kaseorg , Waseem Daher , Denys Vlasenko , Jeff Arnold , Ingo Molnar , Thomas Gleixner , "H. Peter Anvin" , Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/11] section name cleanup for x86 Message-ID: <20090501153434.GA11203@elte.hu> References: <1241136098-10376-1-git-send-email-tabbott@mit.edu> <20090501115849.GB24706@elte.hu> <20090501120757.GA23672@uranus.ravnborg.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090501120757.GA23672@uranus.ravnborg.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) 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 * Sam Ravnborg wrote: > On Fri, May 01, 2009 at 01:58:49PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > * Tim Abbott wrote: > > > > > This patch series cleans up the section names on the x86 > > > architecture. It requires the architecture-independent macro > > > definitions from this patch series: > > > > > > > > > > Hm, we cannot pick the x86 bits up into the x86 tree without > > having these macros upstream first. So those macros need acks > > from Sam and maybe Linus will take them out of order. (they are > > pure additions so they look fairly safe and uncontroversial) > > Thats the plan. Okay - it was a bit confusing at first because the patch-set was posted to us x86 maintainers but had such a generic dependency. I'll wait for you to sort it all out :) Ingo