[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <47EA7030.2080301@sgi.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 08:48:00 -0700
From: Mike Travis <travis@....com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
CC: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/10] NR_CPUS: third reduction of NR_CPUS memory usage
x86-version v2
Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Mike Travis <travis@....com> wrote:
>
>> Wii, isn't this fun...! This is a resubmission of yesterday's patches
>> based on the x86.git/latest tree. Yes, it _is_ a maze of twisty litle
>> passages. ;-)
>
> just to make patch dependencies clear: most of the patches here can be
> applied to their base trees as-is, without depending on any other patch,
> correct?
>
> the only undeclared dependency i found was the cpumask_scnprintf_len()
> patch - please prominently list dependencies in the changelog like this:
>
> [ this patch depends on "cpumask: Add cpumask_scnprintf_len function" ]
>
> Ingo
Ahh, ok. I was under the assumption that an entire patchset would be
applied en-mass and only divided up by bi-sect debugging...?
The second patchset (cpumask) is highly incremental and I did it like
this to show memory gains (or losses). I tossed a few patches that
didn't have any overall goodness (and have a few more to help with
the memory footprint or performance in the queue.)
Thanks,
Mike
--
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