Re: [git pull] x86 updates for v2.6.28, phase #6, misc

[Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>]

On Friday 10 October 2008 19:26, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org> wrote:
> > Nick Piggin wrote:
> >> On Friday 10 October 2008 11:08, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >>> out-of-topic modifications in x86-v28-for-linus-phase6:
> >>> -------------------------------------------------------
> >>> include/linux/kernel.h             # d974ae3: generic, memparse():
> >>> constify arg include/linux/mm.h                 # f7d0b92: mm: define
> >>> USE_SPLIT_PTLOCKS rath # 59ea746: MM: virtual address debug
> >>> include/linux/mm_types.h           # f7d0b92: mm: define
> >>> USE_SPLIT_PTLOCKS rath include/linux/mmdebug.h            # 7aa413d:
> >>> x86, MM: virtual address debug, c # 59ea746: MM: virtual address debug
> >>> lib/cmdline.c
> >>>           # d974ae3: generic, memparse(): constify arg mm/vmalloc.c
> >>>                    # 7aa413d: x86, MM: virtual address debug, c #
> >>> 59ea746: MM:
> >>> virtual address debug
> >>
> >> How come these kinds of things go into the x86 tree? Can't they
> >> be sent to other maintainer first (probably Andrew, in the case
> >> of random -mm stuff).
> >>
> >> OK, it's pretty trivial stuff, but just on principle I can't see
> >> an advantage, and only disadvantages to doing this (and also I
> >> see the vmalloc change clashed with the vmalloc rewrite in -mm).
> >
> > The memparse and split ptlocks changes went past Andrew.  They ended
> > up in Ingo's tree because 1) they're pretty trivial, and 2) there's
> > x86-specific stuff which depends on them.  Don't know about the
> > vmalloc change.
>
> yeah, correct, as Jeremy already noted they had dependencies with PAT
> and other ioremap relevant changes in the x86 tree so it had to be
> layered.

OK fair enough. I thought the virtual address debug stuff was a
bit more significant touching common code.