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
