From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753860Ab2CSUuD (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Mar 2012 16:50:03 -0400 Received: from fgwmail6.fujitsu.co.jp ([192.51.44.36]:52156 "EHLO fgwmail6.fujitsu.co.jp" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752298Ab2CSUuA (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Mar 2012 16:50:00 -0400 Message-ID: <4F679BF2.7040107@jp.fujitsu.com> Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2012 16:49:54 -0400 From: KOSAKI Motohiro User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:10.0.2) Gecko/20120216 Thunderbird/10.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: dledford@redhat.com CC: kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, kosaki.motohiro@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, amwang@redhat.com, jslaby@suse.cz, ebiederm@xmission.com, joe.korty@ccur.com, dhowells@redhat.com Subject: Re: [resend][PATCH 1/3] mqueue: revert bump up DFLT_*MAX References: <79ac1725-6aa2-4d67-8b59-cbf752ea9f3e@zmail13.collab.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <79ac1725-6aa2-4d67-8b59-cbf752ea9f3e@zmail13.collab.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 3/19/2012 2:16 PM, Doug Ledford wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- >> On 3/14/2012 5:45 PM, Doug Ledford wrote: >>> On 03/14/2012 05:38 PM, Andrew Morton wrote: >>>> On Wed, 14 Mar 2012 17:28:33 -0400 >>>> Doug Ledford wrote: >>>> >>>>> This has obviously fallen through the cracks. >>>> >>>> It sure has. Please dig out whatever is the currently favored >>>> patchset, refresh, retest and resend, with changelogging which >>>> fully >>>> covers the reasoning and decision process? >>> >>> OK, completely redoing patch set then against current Linus tree. >>> >>> Motohiro, would you be so kind as to resend my your patches that >>> went on >>> top of mine and I'll create a complete patch set? >> >> I'm sorry. I already have a rebased patch. but I haven't posted. I >> have toa >> hurry. > > Actually, I already pulled them from the lkml archives and fixed up > the one patch that didn't apply cleanly. The only reason I haven't > sent the entire patchset out yet is that I'm writing a test/verification > app to go along with it. OK, I'll stop this work then. Good luck. :) But, please rebase the patch on top linux-next. It's more akpm happy and you are going to see more conflicts. That's the reason why I thought I need more tests.