On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 3:59 PM Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi Arjun, > > On Thu, 20 Feb 2020 15:44:28 -0800 Arjun Roy <arjunroy@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 3:43 PM Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, 20 Feb 2020 15:22:04 -0800 Arjun Roy <arjunroy@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > I have a possible solution in mind, but it would involve a slight > > > > change in the SPARC macro (to be more inline with the semantics of the > > > > other platforms). > > > > If you're open to such a change, I can send it out. > > > > > > Its not up to me :-) > > > > > > If it is not too much work, I would say, do the patch, test it as you > > > can, then send it out cc'ing the Sparc maintainer (DaveM cc'd) and see > > > what happens. > > > > Certainly, I will do so. > > Just one thing: its worth while making it clear to DaveM that you just > want his Ack (rather than for him to take the patch into the Sparc > tree) so that the patch can go into Andrew's tree along with the rest > of the series. > For now since the earlier patches remain in the mm tree (as far as I can tell here https://github.com/hnaz/linux-mm/tree/master) I have just sent a fixup patch for the sparc compilation issue to mm-next. I also indicated the ack request to DaveM. Thanks, -Arjun > -- > Cheers, > Stephen Rothwell
