On Wed, 6 Jul 2011 01:53:16 -0700 Ram Pai <linuxram@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sun, Jul 03, 2011 at 02:30:00PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > and I'd really change the function argument to take that kind of > > simplified thing instead. > > > > And that cleanup/re-organization would be prime material for a totally > > independent patch that changes no semantics at all, just prepares for > > the other changes. > > > > That way the final "patch 2" would be smaller and do the semantic > > changes, instead of being a mix of semantic changes and infrastructure > > changes. > > > > And some of the cleanup stuff I could merge for 3.0 just to make things easier. > > > > Hmm? > > Here is a cleaned up patch that just adds functionality to kernel/resource.c > It does make a small semantic addition to allocate_resource(), where it reallocates > the resource with a newer size if that resource was already allocated. > > Will this be acceptable for 3.0.0? Up to Linus, I have no problem with the patch though, it seems like a good cleanup and is good to keep separate from the other patches. Once it lands I can queue up the dependent patches in -next. Thanks, -- Jesse Barnes, Intel Open Source Technology Center -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
