From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Ahern Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2015 18:34:44 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] sparc: perf: Make counting mode actually work Message-Id: <550B16C4.2030703@oracle.com> List-Id: References: <1424747257-141252-3-git-send-email-david.ahern@oracle.com> In-Reply-To: <1424747257-141252-3-git-send-email-david.ahern@oracle.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: sparclinux@vger.kernel.org On 3/19/15 12:29 PM, David Miller wrote: > From: David Ahern > Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2015 08:15:17 -0600 > >> I realize M7 patches are on hold by you. This one (and the first one >> in this set) has nothing to do with the M7. perf counting mode has >> been broken for years on sparc; this patch fixes it. > > Not on hold, I'm simply waiting for them to be resubmitted. > > Anything not marked "under review" in patchwork needs to be explicitly > resubmitting anew if you want me to consider it. > > Sorry if that wasn't clear. > Help me understand your process for patches ... I sent the patches to you and the mailing list. You responded only to the M7 patch (2 of 3). Should I take that to mean the entire set is invalidated? ie., how do I know if a patch is marked 'under review'? If patches are not directly related to one another you want them as individual patches -- versus what I did here which is 3 individual patches that touch sparc/perf code. Most of my patches have gone through acme and he gladly takes individual patches from a set.