[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <3908561D78D1C84285E8C5FCA982C28F61384020@ORSMSX114.amr.corp.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2017 16:29:43 +0000
From: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>
To: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>
CC: Santosh Sivaraj <santosh@...six.org>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>,
"Yu, Fenghua" <fenghua.yu@...el.com>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
James Bottomley <jejb@...isc-linux.org>,
Helge Deller <deller@....de>, Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Jessica Yu <jeyu@...nel.org>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
"linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org" <linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-parisc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-parisc@...r.kernel.org>,
"linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [RFC][PATCH v2 0/7] printk/ia64/ppc64/parisc64: let's deprecate
%pF/%pf printk specifiers
> speaking of upstream, any objections if this patch set will go through
> the printk tree, in one piece?
Seems to be a better idea than trying to coordinate pulls from three
separate "arch/" trees. Fine with me.
-Tony
Powered by blists - more mailing lists