From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753742Ab1AJQo0 (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Jan 2011 11:44:26 -0500 Received: from smtp1.linux-foundation.org ([140.211.169.13]:59162 "EHLO smtp1.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753622Ab1AJQoZ (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Jan 2011 11:44:25 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: From: Linus Torvalds Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 08:44:03 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] SLAB changes for v2.6.38 To: Pekka Enberg Cc: cl@linux-foundation.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Jan 9, 2011 at 1:13 AM, Pekka Enberg wrote: > > It's been rather quiet for slab allocators this merge cycle. There's only > few cleanups here. The bug fixes were merged in v2.6.37 already. As they > were cherry-picked from this branch, they show up in the pull request > (what's up with that btw). For the "what's up with that btw" department: A cherry-pick really is nothing but "apply the same patch as a different commit". So there is no way to say "this is already there" - because it really isn't. It's a totally different thing. In fact, it would be very wrong to filter them out, both from a fundamental design standpoint, but also from a usability/reliability standpoint: cherry-picks are by no means guaranteed to be identical to the source - like any "re-apply the patch in another place" model, the end result is not at all guaranteed to be semantically identical simply due to different bases: the patches may not even be identical, and even if they are, the results of the code may depend on what else is going on. So don't think of cherry-picks as "the same commit". It's not, and it never will be. It's a totally separate commit, they just share some superficial commonalities. Linus