Hello, Stephen. On 02/05/2010 02:16 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Date: Fri, 5 Feb 2010 16:09:11 +1100 > Subject: [PATCH] percpu: add __percpu for sparse > > This is to make the annotation of percpu variables during the next merge > window less painfull. > > Extracted from a patch by Rusty Russell. I started doing this and it's a bit ridiculous. If I split the patches into separate trees with maintainers, I end up with a lot of one or several liners and all that those patches do is adding __percpu to a variable or field declaration which doesn't affect normal builds at all. The only conflicts I had against the current mainline is the ones which got changed in the percpu tree by Christoph's patches. Given the wide number of trees this will end up on and given the triviality of each change, I think it would better to keep these in the percpu tree. It'll make things harder track without adding much benefit. If non-trivial confict ever happens, please feel free to drop it from linux-next and let me know. Thanks. -- tejun -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
