On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 00:16, Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I'm OK with patches 1-5, 7-13, 15-16, 18, 20-21, & 23-24 so far, That means you've been reservations about: 6: wording [on get_user() and put_user() section] 14: Rewrite local_irq_{disable,enable,save,restore} 17: Reword/expand local_bh_* section 19: CPU id on [0,NR_CPUS) 22: Return conventions 25: Contributors chapter After some discussion and changes, here's the status of each: 6: OK (after changes) 14: OK? (no reply to my changes) 17: ? No discussion ever took place 19: OK (after changes) 22: OK? (no reply to my comment) 25: OK? (no reply to my comment) Therefore: * What's wrong with 17? * Should I assume 14, 22, and 25 are OK? * Should I submit v2 patches for just 6, 14, and 19? In particular, I'll assume that all patches EXCEPT for the old versions of 6, 14, and 19 have been applied. Then I'll submit three v2 patches that provide new versions of 6, 14, and 19. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html