[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <AANLkTikzOUHZzkHhw3j0r19=kT=cgcw4F3d7SEanwuui@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2011 10:55:39 -0700
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Milton Miller <miltonm@....com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
Anton Blanchard <anton@...ba.org>,
xiaoguangrong@...fujitsu.com, mingo@...e.hu, jaxboe@...ionio.com,
npiggin@...il.com, rusty@...tcorp.com.au, efault@....de,
Jan Beulich <JBeulich@...ell.com>,
Dimitri Sivanich <sivanich@....com>,
Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>, paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
benh@...nel.crashing.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4 v3] smp_call_function_many issues from review
On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 12:27 PM, Milton Miller <miltonm@....com> wrote:
>
> Looking forward, I would suggest 1 and 2 are required for stable, 3 may
> be suitable as it fixes races that otherwise requires cpumask copies
> as in 75c1c91cb92806f960fcd6e53d2a0c21f343081c ([IA64] eliminate race
> condition in smp_flush_tlb_mm). By contrast 4 is just comments except
> for the %pS to %pf change.
Ok, who should I expect to take this series from? I think the last
batch came through Andrew. The kernel/smp.c file seems to be one of
those "unclear maintenance rules" one. The git statistics for the last
12 months seem to be
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> (commit_signer:4/9=44%)
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> (commit_signer:2/9=22%)
Milton Miller <miltonm@....com> (commit_signer:2/9=22%)
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org> (commit_signer:2/9=22%)
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> (commit_signer:2/9=22%)
according to get_maintainer.pl. Should I just take these directly?
Linus
--
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