On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 09:22:06PM -0400, Dennis Dalessandro wrote: > On 10/4/2017 3:44 PM, Doug Ledford wrote: > > On Mon, 2017-10-02 at 11:03 -0700, Dennis Dalessandro wrote: > > > Hi Doug, > > > There are a couple fixes in here that would have been nice to get > > > into the RC > > > cycle, including one marked stable. However I think you will find > > > them to be > > > too many LOC for an rc-4 submission so I have sent them in one series > > > for-next. > > > Patches 2,3,4 and 5 are the fixes. Patch 2 is small but it's not > > > really that > > > important to the end user. > > > > > > There are some clean ups in here from Don from the 16B changes. One > > > takes care > > > of some sparse warnings and the other two are from a WARN_ON_ONCE > > > that needed > > > special cased for OPA. > > > > > > Patches can can also be found in my GitHub repo at: > > > https://github.com/ddalessa/kernel/tree/for-4.15 > > > > Hi Denny, > > > > I didn't process that you mixed for-rc and for-next stuff in a single > > thread before I had gone through and looked at the patches and > > processed them. So, this time they all went to for-next. In the > > future, you really need patches you want in for-rc separate from the > > patches intended for for-next. > > Maybe I wasn't too clear, I didn't intend any of those to go for-rc. So yep > for-next was the right target. > > I would have liked to get the fixes into -rc but they were just too complex > for this late in the game is all I meant. IMHO, the number of LOCs shouldn't be the gating factor for -rc, but the severity of fixes yes. Thanks > > -Denny > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature