[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20190214183854.GA10795@rapoport-lnx>
Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2019 20:38:55 +0200
From: Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.ibm.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...ive.com>,
Richard Kuo <rkuo@...eaurora.org>, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
linux-hexagon@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] provide a generic free_initmem implementation
On Thu, Feb 14, 2019 at 06:04:16PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> This look fine to me, but I'm a little worried that as-is this will
> just create conflicts with my series..
I'll rebase on top of your patches once they are in. Or I can send both
series as a single set.
Preferences?
--
Sincerely yours,
Mike.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists