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

[Greg Kroah-Hartman]

On Fri, Dec 07, 2012 at 12:47:36PM +0100, "Jan H. Schönherr" wrote:
> 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?

You are correct, I'll end up queuing these up to my tree when 3.8-rc1 is
out, they will live in linux-next until 3.8-final is out, and then go to
Linus for 3.9-rc1.  Right now, my trees are frozen due to the merge
window about to open up.  Your patience is appreciated.

thanks,

greg k-h
--
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/