On Wed, 2015-01-28 at 14:14 -0600, Kim Phillips wrote: > On Wed, 28 Jan 2015 14:22:02 +1100 > Michael Ellerman <mpe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Tue, 2015-01-27 at 18:57 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > On Wed, 28 Jan 2015 10:33:59 +0900 Joonsoo Kim <js1304@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > 2015-01-28 10:01 GMT+09:00 Michael Ellerman <mpe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > > > > > On Mon, 2015-01-26 at 13:22 -0600, Kim Phillips wrote: > > > > >> arch/powerpc has __kernel_map_pages implementations in mm/pgtable_32.c, and > > > > > > > > > > I'd be happy to take this through the powerpc tree for 3.20, but for this: > > > > > > > > > >> depends on: > > > > >> From: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@xxxxxxx> > > > > >> Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2015 10:28:58 +0900 > > > > >> Subject: [PATCH] mm/debug_pagealloc: fix build failure on ppc and some other archs > > > > > > > > > > I don't have that patch in my tree. > > > > > > > > > > But in what way does this patch depend on that one? > > > > > > > > > > It looks to me like it'd be safe to take this on its own, or am I wrong? > > > > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > > > These two patches are merged to Andrew's tree now. > > > > > > That didn't answer either of Michael's questions ;) > > > > > > Yes, I think they're independent. I was holding off on the powerpc > > sorry - my bad, they are indeed completely independent. No worries. > > > one, waiting to see if it popped up in linux-next via your tree. I can > > > merge both if you like? > > > > Right, I didn't think I'd seen it in your tree :) > > > > I'm happy to take this one, saves a possible merge conflict. > > I'm fine either way (I work on linux-next). Cool. It's in my next as of now, so should be in linux-next tomorrow (30th). cheers -- 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>