+cc Sean On Wed, Jun 14, 2023 at 06:57:01PM -0700, Raghavendra Rao Ananta wrote: > On Wed, Jun 14, 2023 at 5:19 AM Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Hi Raghavendra, > > > > On Tue, Jun 06, 2023 at 07:28:51PM +0000, Raghavendra Rao Ananta wrote: > > > The series is based off of upstream v6.4-rc2, and applied David > > > Matlack's common API for TLB invalidations[1] on top. > > > > Sorry I didn't spot the dependency earlier, but this isn't helpful TBH. > > > > David's series was partially applied, and what remains no longer cleanly > > applies to the base you suggest. Independent of that, my *strong* > > preference is that you just send out a series containing your patches as > > well as David's. Coordinating dependent efforts is the only sane thing > > to do. Also, those patches are 5 months old at this point which is > > ancient history. > > > Would you rather prefer I detach this series from David's as I'm not > sure what his plans are for future versions? > On the other hand, the patches seem simple enough to rebase and give > another shot at review, but may end up delaying this series. > WDYT? In cases such as this you'd typically coordinate with the other developer to pick up their changes as part of your series. Especially for this case -- David's refactoring is _pointless_ without another user for that code (i.e. arm64). As fun as it might be to antagonize Sean, that series pokes x86 and I'd like an ack from on it. So, please post a combined series that applies cleanly to an early 6.4 rc of your choosing, and cc all affected reviewers/maintainers. -- Thanks, Oliver
