Re: [PATCH v2 00/14] printk() fixes, optimizations, and clean ups

["Jan H. Schönherr"]

Am 07.12.2012 03:51, schrieb Joe Perches:
> On Thu, 2012-12-06 at 16:19 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
>> On Thu, 06 Dec 2012 15:37:30 -0800
>> Joe Perches <joe@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> Can you please pick this up for -next now and I'll
>>> redo my patches against -next for -rc1 so I'm not
>>> delayed until 3.9?
>>
>> It would be better to do things in the other order.
>>
>> a) Your patches perform mainly code-movement which doesn't cause
>>    functional changes.  Jan's patches are functional changes which
>>    require more thought and testing and possible fixups.
> 
> Fine by me.  Jan?

No problem.

I agree with Andrew, that patches 9 to 14 could use indeed some
more eyeballs.

Patches 1 to 8 are more straight-forward, and I would consider
these ready. However, they are also those, where I probably won't
have any trouble rebasing them on top of your changes.


Anyway. Until now I always thought my patches will end up in the
queue of some maintainer, so that I don't have to bother about
_when_ posting my patches. Therefore: when should I repost a
version rebased on top of Joe's changes?

(If I'd get some opinions on 9 to 14 until then, all the better.)

Regards
Jan

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/