Han Xin <chiyutianyi@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >> Clever. Looks good to me. >> >> For some reason I was expecting this patch to have some connection to >> one of the earlier ones (perhaps because get_data() was mentioned), >> but it is technically independent. > > I think I should adjust the order of this patch to move it forward. Or just eject it from the series and send it in as an independent single patch?
