From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755132Ab2EEBJi (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 May 2012 21:09:38 -0400 Received: from mga01.intel.com ([192.55.52.88]:40217 "EHLO mga01.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753083Ab2EEBJh (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 May 2012 21:09:37 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.71,315,1320652800"; d="scan'208";a="149538800" Message-ID: <4FA47DCD.8000801@intel.com> Date: Sat, 05 May 2012 09:09:33 +0800 From: Alex Shi User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:9.0) Gecko/20111229 Thunderbird/9.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andrew Morton CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, cl@gentwo.org, eric.dumazet@gmail.com, tglx@linutronix.de, avi@redhat.com, davem@davemloft.net, kaber@trash.net, a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl, ying.huang@intel.com, konrad.wilk@oracle.com, hpa@zytor.com, jeremy@goop.org Subject: Re: [PATH v2 0/5] Code clean up for percpu_xxx serial functions References: <1326470018-22342-1-git-send-email-alex.shi@intel.com> <20120504142926.a930ba90.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20120504142926.a930ba90.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 05/05/2012 05:29 AM, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Fri, 13 Jan 2012 23:53:33 +0800 > Alex Shi wrote: > >> I am sorry for spelling mistaken on konrad's email address, so resend >> for correct this. Please reply this resend email. >> >> --------------- >> Thanks for TJ's suggestion, I split the serial patch smaller for >> potential bisection convenience. >> >> Compare to v1 patch, this v2 patches has separate function replace >> patches and final dead code clean up patch. >> >> The net, xen and x86 part code are independent. >> >> After each part was accepted in kernel, the final(5th) clean up code >> do the real clean up in next merge window. I will refresh the patch >> at that time. >> >> Any further comments are appreciated! >> > > I'm still sitting on these patches. The review was a bit inconclusive > and confusing and everyone will have forgotten all about everything. I > think I'll drop them and ask for a resend, please. > > Be sure to update the changelogs so that they address everything which > was discussed last time - so we don't end up covering the same ground. > Please also Cc everyone who was involved in the discussion last time. > Thanks for comments. I will try to refresh this upon mm tree next week. >