On Thu, 26 Apr 2007, Andrew Morton wrote: > Were any cleanups made which were not also applicable as standalone things > to mainline? Ahh. I think I know what you mean. The current patchset is for performance testing against mainline. Lets first cover the bases and then see where we go. It is not against mm. I will submit pieces to mm depending on the outcome of our discussions. - 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/
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [00/17] Large Blocksize Support V3
- From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
- Re: [00/17] Large Blocksize Support V3
- References:
- [00/17] Large Blocksize Support V3
- From: [email protected]
- Re: [00/17] Large Blocksize Support V3
- From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
- Re: [00/17] Large Blocksize Support V3
- From: David Chinner <[email protected]>
- Re: [00/17] Large Blocksize Support V3
- From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
- Re: [00/17] Large Blocksize Support V3
- From: David Chinner <[email protected]>
- Re: [00/17] Large Blocksize Support V3
- From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
- Re: [00/17] Large Blocksize Support V3
- From: Christoph Lameter <[email protected]>
- Re: [00/17] Large Blocksize Support V3
- From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
- [00/17] Large Blocksize Support V3
- Prev by Date: Re: [patch -mm] oom: fix constraint deadlock
- Next by Date: Re: [PATCH] cancel_delayed_work: use del_timer() instead of del_timer_sync()
- Previous by thread: Re: [00/17] Large Blocksize Support V3
- Next by thread: Re: [00/17] Large Blocksize Support V3
- Index(es):
 |