[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <bc64b4640807081418ia871a24me96458bcf64ca9a0@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2008 01:18:44 +0400
From: Dmitry <dbaryshkov@...il.com>
To: "Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc: "Andrew Morton" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Jesse Barnes" <jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
"Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...hat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] Generic per-device coherent dma allocator
2008/6/30 Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>:
>
> * Dmitry Baryshkov <dbaryshkov@...il.com> wrote:
>
>> Currently x86_32, sh and cris-v32 provide per-device coherent dma
>> memory allocator. However their implementation is nearly identical.
>> Refactor out common code to be reused by them.
>
> looks good to me in principle.
>
> Andrew, Jesse: i've put this aside into the core/generic-dma-coherent
> git tree which you can check at:
>
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/linux-2.6-tip.git core/generic-dma-coherent
>
> there's some interaction with other x86 bits so i guess it would be best
> to carry this in -tip.
>
> Do the generic bits look good to you? (find the shortlog and diff below)
> It's not yet propagated into linux-next, pending your ack/nak and
> pending some test exposure.
>
I still don't see this in the linux-next. Is it simply a metter of
time? Can I expect
these two patches to be merged during 2.6.27 cycle?
--
With best wishes
Dmitry
--
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