On Fri, 23 Aug 2013, Tejun Heo wrote: > * It would be a lot easier to route the patches if each had cc's to > the maintainers of the affected subsystems. So the drivers patch needs to CC all driver maintainers? There must be some easier way to get this done. > * Dunno what's the convention around conccinelle scripts but do we > need to keep them around if the accessor being converted gets > removed at the end of the series? > > How do you want to route the patches? I'm gonna apply the second > patch which updates __verify_pcpu_ptr() to the percpu tree right away > and push it to Linus early during the merge window so that pushing > other patches through different trees from there on isn't too painful. Not sure how to do this. Thats why its an RFC. I cced Andrew because he usually knows how to deal with massive patches like this. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arch" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
