From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+w=401wt.eu-S1763285AbYDVXTa@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1763285AbYDVXTa (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Tue, 22 Apr 2008 19:19:30 -0400
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S933511AbYDVXTJ
	(ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel-outgoing>);
	Tue, 22 Apr 2008 19:19:09 -0400
Received: from relay2.sgi.com ([192.48.171.30]:32954 "EHLO relay.sgi.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S933480AbYDVXTI (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 22 Apr 2008 19:19:08 -0400
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2008 16:19:06 -0700 (PDT)
From: Christoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com>
X-X-Sender: clameter@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com
To: Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@qumranet.com>
cc: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>, Jack Steiner <steiner@sgi.com>,
       Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
       kvm-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, Kanoj Sarcar <kanojsarcar@yahoo.com>,
       Roland Dreier <rdreier@cisco.com>,
       Steve Wise <swise@opengridcomputing.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
       Avi Kivity <avi@qumranet.com>, linux-mm@kvack.org,
       Robin Holt <holt@sgi.com>, general@lists.openfabrics.org,
       Hugh Dickins <hugh@veritas.com>, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
       Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 10 of 12] Convert mm_lock to use semaphores after
 i_mmap_lock and anon_vma_lock
In-Reply-To: <20080422225424.GT24536@duo.random>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0804221615150.4868@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com>
References: <f8210c45f1c6f8b38d15.1208872286@duo.random>
 <Pine.LNX.4.64.0804221325490.3640@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com>
 <20080422225424.GT24536@duo.random>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Wed, 23 Apr 2008, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:

> The right patch ordering isn't necessarily the one that reduces the
> total number of lines in the patchsets. The mmu-notifier-core is
> already converged and can go in. The rest isn't converged at
> all... nearly nobody commented on the other part (the few comments so
> far were negative), so there's no good reason to delay indefinitely
> what is already converged, given it's already feature complete for
> certain users of the code. My patch ordering looks more natural to
> me. What is finished goes in, the rest is orthogonal anyway.

I would not want to review code that is later reverted or essentially 
changed in later patches. I only review your patches because we have a 
high interest in the patch. I suspect that others will be more willing to 
review this material if it would be done the right way.

If you cannot produce an easily reviewable and properly formatted patchset 
that follows conventions then I will have to do it because we really need 
to get this merged.