linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/19] get rid of superfluous __GFP

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20160512131328.b2b45b2f6b6847b882286424@linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Thu, 12 May 2016 13:13:28 -0700
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
Cc:	linux-mm@...ck.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
	Chen Liqin <liqin.linux@...il.com>,
	Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@...lanox.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Guan Xuetao <gxt@...c.pku.edu.cn>,
	Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
	Helge Deller <deller@....de>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	"James E.J. Bottomley" <jejb@...isc-linux.org>,
	John Crispin <blogic@...nwrt.org>,
	Lennox Wu <lennox.wu@...il.com>,
	Ley Foon Tan <lftan@...era.com>,
	Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>,
	Matt Fleming <matt@...eblueprint.co.uk>,
	Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@...hat.com>,
	Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>,
	Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	Shaohua Li <shli@...nel.org>, "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Vineet Gupta <vgupta@...opsys.com>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
	Yoshinori Sato <ysato@...rs.sourceforge.jp>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/19] get rid of superfluous __GFP_REPEAT

On Thu, 12 May 2016 18:53:11 +0200 Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org> wrote:

> Andrew,
> do you think this should go in in the next merge window or should I
> repost after rc1 is out? I do not mind one way or the other. I would
> obviously would like to get them in sooner rather than later but I can
> certainly live with these wait a bit longer.

Yup, after -rc1 would suit.  Or resend them now and I'll queue them for
4.7-rc2.