From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756069Ab2DTMXG (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Apr 2012 08:23:06 -0400 Received: from mailout1.w1.samsung.com ([210.118.77.11]:50165 "EHLO mailout1.w1.samsung.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753488Ab2DTMXD (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Apr 2012 08:23:03 -0400 Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2012 14:22:55 +0200 From: Marek Szyprowski Subject: RE: [PATCHv24 00/16] Contiguous Memory Allocator In-reply-to: <20120419124044.632bfa49.akpm@linux-foundation.org> To: "'Andrew Morton'" Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-media@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org, "'Michal Nazarewicz'" , "'Kyungmin Park'" , "'Russell King'" , "'KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki'" , "'Daniel Walker'" , "'Mel Gorman'" , "'Arnd Bergmann'" , "'Jesse Barker'" , "'Jonathan Corbet'" , "'Chunsang Jeong'" , "'Dave Hansen'" , "'Benjamin Gaignard'" , "'Rob Clark'" , "'Ohad Ben-Cohen'" , "'Sandeep Patil'" Message-id: <03b201cd1ef0$50ca9350$f25fb9f0$%szyprowski@samsung.com> Organization: SPRC MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-language: pl Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Thread-index: Ac0eZFLmHYIDO0PBTqCxcT1bd6hlZAAiuaow References: <1333462221-3987-1-git-send-email-m.szyprowski@samsung.com> <20120419124044.632bfa49.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Andrew, On Thursday, April 19, 2012 9:41 PM Andrew Morton wrote: > On Tue, 03 Apr 2012 16:10:05 +0200 > Marek Szyprowski wrote: > > > This is (yet another) update of CMA patches. > > Looks OK to me. It's a lot of code. > > Please move it into linux-next, and if all is well, ask Linus to pull > the tree into 3.5-rc1. Please be sure to cc me on that email. Ok, thanks! Is it possible to get your acked-by or reviewed-by tag? It might help a bit to get the pull request accepted by Linus. :) > I suggest that you include additional patches which enable CMA as much > as possible on as many architectures as possible so that it gets > maximum coverage testing in linux-next. Remove those Kconfig patches > when merging upstream. > > All this code will probably mess up my tree, but I'll work that out. > It would be more awkward if the CMA code were to later disappear from > linux-next or were not merged into 3.5-rc1. Let's avoid that. I've put the patches on my dma-mapping-next branch and we will see the result (and/or complaints) on Monday. Best regards -- Marek Szyprowski Samsung Poland R&D Center