Sure, I could do this, but as I understood from earlier Dave Miller's
comments, we should do one logical change at a time. Hence, introduce API in
one patch use it in another. So, this is how I tried to organize this patch
set. Is this assumption incorrect?
Well, it really depends. If the patch is really small then adding a new
API along with users is easier to review and backport because you have a
clear view of the usage. I believe this is the case here. But if others
feel otherwise I will not object.
I will merge them.
Thank you,
Pasha
--
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>
