From: Herbert Xu <[email protected]>
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 17:03:56 +1000
> On Mon, Jun 12, 2006 at 08:57:01AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > regarding your point wrt. path of integration - it is pretty much the
> > only practical way to do this centrally as part of the lock validator
> > patches, but to collect ACKs from subsystem maintainers in the process.
> > So if you like it i'd like to have your ACK but this patch depends on
> > the other lock validator patches (and only makes sense together with
> > them), so they should temporarily stay in the lock validator queue.
> > Hopefully this wont be a state that lasts too long and once the
> > validator is upstream, all patches of course go via the subsystem
> > submission rules.
>
> Obviously as long as Dave is happy with it then it's fine. However,
> it's probably a good idea to cc netdev for relevant patches so that
> they get a wider review. If you've already sent this one there then
> I apologise for missing it :)
Yes, this is fine with me.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
