On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 9:50 AM, David Miller <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > From: Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@xxxxxxxxx> > Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2016 09:16:39 -0800 > >> I tried to get in touch with Andrew about this fix but I haven't heard any >> reply to the email I sent out on Tuesday. The last comment I had from >> Andrew against v1 was "Looks good to me. I have it all queued for post-4.9 >> processing.", but I haven't received any notice they were applied. > > Andrew, please follow up with Alex. I'm assuming Andrew is probably out for the holidays since I didn't hear anything, and since Linux pushed 4.10-rc1 I'm assuming I have missed the merge window. Dave, I was wondering if you would be okay with me trying to push the three patches though net-next. I'm thinking I might scale back the first patch so that it is just a rename instead of making any functional changes. The main reason why I am thinking of trying to submit through net-next is because then I can then start working on submitting the driver patches for net-next. Otherwise I'm looking at this set creating a merge mess since I don't see a good way to push the driver changes without already having these changes present. I'll wait until Andrew can weigh in on the patches before resubmitting. My thought was to get an Acked-by from him and then see if I can get them accepted into net-next. That way there isn't any funky cross-tree merging that will need to go on, and it shouldn't really impact the mm tree all that much as the only consumers for the page frag code are the network stack anyway. Thanks. - Alex -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>