[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20160323133137.944775ef2e70a8a505aabd24@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2016 13:31:37 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: "Hillf Danton" <hillf.zj@...baba-inc.com>
Cc: "'Vaishali Thakkar'" <vaishali.thakkar@...cle.com>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
"'Mike Kravetz'" <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>,
"'Naoya Horiguchi'" <n-horiguchi@...jp.nec.com>,
"'Michal Hocko'" <mhocko@...e.com>,
"'Yaowei Bai'" <baiyaowei@...s.chinamobile.com>,
"'Dominik Dingel'" <dingel@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"'Kirill A. Shutemov'" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
"'Paul Gortmaker'" <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>,
"'Dave Hansen'" <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
"'Chris Metcalf'" <cmetcalf@...hip.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] arch:mm: Use hugetlb_bad_size
On Wed, 23 Mar 2016 12:12:48 +0800 "Hillf Danton" <hillf.zj@...baba-inc.com> wrote:
> >
> > Do you want me to send new version of the patchset breaking this patch in
> > to separate patches?
> >
> Yes.
That would be a bit of a pain because then each arch maintainer will
need to check that the [1/1] patch is merged. In fact the arch
maintainer can't actually merge the arch patch locally without having
[1/1] present.
Simply acking this patch would make life much simpler, please.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists