On 10/17/2013 10:21 AM, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Oct 2013, Chen Gang wrote:
>
>>> I think your patches should be acked before being merged into linux-next,
>>> Hugh just had to revert another one that did affect Linus's tree in
>>> 1ecfd533f4c5 ("mm/mremap.c: call pud_free() after fail calling
>>> pmd_alloc()"). I had to revert your entire series of mpol_to_str()
>>> changes in -mm. It's getting ridiculous and a waste of other people's
>>> time.
>>>
>>
>> If always get no reply, what to do, next?
>>
>
> If nobody ever acks your patches, they probably aren't that important. At
> the very least, something that nobody has looked at shouldn't be included
> if it's going to introduce a regression.
>
At least, that is not quite polite.
And when get conclusion, please based on the proofs: "is it necessary to
list them to check whether they are 'important' or not"?
>> But all together, I welcome you to help ack/nack my patches for mm
>> sub-system (although I don't know your ack/nack whether have effect or not).
>>
>
> If it touches mm, then there is someone on this list who can ack it and
> you can cc them by looking at the output of scripts/get_maintainer.pl. If
> nobody is interested in it, or if it doesn't do anything important, nobody
> is going to spend their time reviewing it.
>
Of cause, every time, I send patch according to "scripts/get_maintainer.pl".
So again: "is it necessary to list them to check whether they are
'important' or not?"
> I'm not going to continue this thread, the patch in question has been
> removed from -mm so I have no further interest in discussing it.
>
>
OK, end discussing if you no reply.
Thanks.
--
Chen Gang
--
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>