Re: [net/mm PATCH v2 0/3] Page fragment updates
From: Alexander Duyck
Date: Tue Dec 27 2016 - 13:54:29 EST
On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 9:50 AM, David Miller <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> From: Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@xxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2016 09:16:39 -0800
>> I tried to get in touch with Andrew about this fix but I haven't heard any
>> reply to the email I sent out on Tuesday. The last comment I had from
>> Andrew against v1 was "Looks good to me. I have it all queued for post-4.9
>> processing.", but I haven't received any notice they were applied.
> Andrew, please follow up with Alex.
I'm assuming Andrew is probably out for the holidays since I didn't
hear anything, and since Linux pushed 4.10-rc1 I'm assuming I have
missed the merge window.
Dave, I was wondering if you would be okay with me trying to push the
three patches though net-next. I'm thinking I might scale back the
first patch so that it is just a rename instead of making any
functional changes. The main reason why I am thinking of trying to
submit through net-next is because then I can then start working on
submitting the driver patches for net-next. Otherwise I'm looking at
this set creating a merge mess since I don't see a good way to push
the driver changes without already having these changes present.
I'll wait until Andrew can weigh in on the patches before
resubmitting. My thought was to get an Acked-by from him and then see
if I can get them accepted into net-next. That way there isn't any
funky cross-tree merging that will need to go on, and it shouldn't
really impact the mm tree all that much as the only consumers for the
page frag code are the network stack anyway.