[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZLtNRsDuN4xEMSMB@MiWiFi-R3L-srv>
Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2023 11:30:14 +0800
From: Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com>
To: Dennis Zhou <dennis@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, tj@...nel.org, cl@...ux.com,
mawupeng1@...wei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] percpu: some trivial cleanup patches
On 07/21/23 at 02:04pm, Dennis Zhou wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Fri, Jul 21, 2023 at 09:17:57PM +0800, Baoquan He wrote:
> > There's a left issue in my mailbox about percpu code at below. When
> > I rechecked it and considered Dennis's comment, I made an attmept
> > to fix it with patch 3.
> >
> > https://lore.kernel.org/all/Y407wDMKq5ibE9sc@fedora/T/#u
> >
> > Patch 1 and 2 are trivial clean up patches when reading percpu code.
> >
> > Baoquan He (3):
> > mm/percpu.c: remove redundant check
> > mm/percpu.c: optimize the code in pcpu_setup_first_chunk() a little
> > bit
> > mm/percpu.c: print error message too if atomic alloc failed
> >
> > mm/percpu.c | 39 +++++++++++++++++----------------------
> > 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
> >
> > --
> > 2.34.1
> >
>
> Thanks for these. I left a few comments. I think I might have some stuff
> for v6.6, I'll figure that out in a couple days. If that's so, I can
> pull 1, probably massage 2 and send that out again, and then I think
> you'll need to resend 3.
Sure, thanks for careful reviewing and great suggestion. So I only need
to send v2 of patch 3, right? Or I should change and send v2 of the
whold series? I may not get it clear.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists