[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <OF2AD534B2.A4948D9F-ONC1257267.006D39E5-85257267.006DAB06@de.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2007 14:57:54 -0500
From: Hoang-Nam Nguyen <HNGUYEN@...ibm.com>
To: Roland Dreier <rdreier@...co.com>
Cc: hch@...radead.org, Christoph Raisch <raisch@...ibm.com>,
Hoang-Nam Nguyen <hnguyen@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...abs.org,
linuxppc-dev-bounces+hnguyen=de.ibm.com@...abs.org,
openfabrics-ewg@...nib.org, openib-general@...nib.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC 2.6.21] ehca: ehca_uverbs.c: refactor ehca_mmap() for better
readability
No problem. Will resend the full patch set for 2.6.21.
Thanks
Nam
linuxppc-dev-bounces+hnguyen=de.ibm.com@...abs.org wrote on 18.01.2007
13:56:01:
> I've kind of lost the plot here. How does this patch fit in with the
> previous series of patches you posted? Does it replace them or go on
> top of them?
>
> Can please you resend me the full series of patch that remove the use
> of do_mmap(), with all cleanups and bug fixes included? And please
> roll up the fixes, I don't want one patch that adds a yield() inside a
> spinlock and then a later patch to fix it -- there's no sense in
> adding landmines for people potentially doing git bisect in the
> future.
>
> And also please try to split the patches so that they don't mix
> together two things -- please try to make the "remove obsolete
> prototypes" patch separate from the mmap fixes.
>
> Thanks...
> _______________________________________________
> Linuxppc-dev mailing list
> Linuxppc-dev@...abs.org
> https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists