[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ecd0a178-3890-5fad-2313-11b3df907f9f@nvidia.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2019 13:47:47 -0800
From: John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>
To: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
CC: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@...el.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>,
David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
"David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@...el.com>,
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Jérôme Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>,
Magnus Karlsson <magnus.karlsson@...el.com>,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>, <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
<dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>, <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-block@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-media@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>,
<linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-mm@...ck.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Aneesh Kumar K . V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 02/24] mm/gup: factor out duplicate code from four
routines
On 11/21/19 1:49 AM, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Thu 21-11-19 00:29:59, John Hubbard wrote:
>> On 11/21/19 12:03 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>>> Otherwise this looks fine and might be a worthwhile cleanup to feed
>>> Andrew for 5.5 independent of the gut of the changes.
>>>
>>> Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
>>>
>>
>> Thanks for the reviews! Say, it sounds like your view here is that this
>> series should be targeted at 5.6 (not 5.5), is that what you have in mind?
>> And get the preparatory patches (1-9, and maybe even 10-16) into 5.5?
>
> Yeah, actually I feel the same. The merge window is going to open on Sunday
> and the series isn't still fully baked and happily sitting in linux-next
> (and larger changes should really sit in linux-next for at least a week,
> preferably two, before the merge window opens to get some reasonable test
> coverage). So I'd take out the independent easy patches that are already
> reviewed, get them merged into Andrew's (or whatever other appropriate
> tree) now so that they get at least a week of testing in linux-next before
> going upstream. And the more involved bits will have to wait for 5.6 -
> which means let's just continue working on them as we do now because
> ideally in 4 weeks we should have them ready with all the reviews so that
> they can be picked up and integrated into linux-next.
>
> Honza
OK, thanks for spelling it out. I'll shift over to getting the easy patches
prepared for 5.5, for now.
thanks,
--
John Hubbard
NVIDIA
Powered by blists - more mailing lists