On Wed, 2 Apr 2008 18:30:24 -0700 Yinghai Lu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> v2 replace: > [PATCH] mm: make mem_map allocation continuous. > [PATCH] mm: allocate section_map for sparse_init > [PATCH] mm: allocate usemap at first instead of mem_map in sparse_init > err, no. > > diff --git a/mm/sparse.c b/mm/sparse.c > index f6a43c0..2881222 100644 > --- a/mm/sparse.c > +++ b/mm/sparse.c Sorry, but I'd rather not do it this way. We presently have this: mm-make-mem_map-allocation-continuous.patch mm-make-mem_map-allocation-continuous-checkpatch-fixes.patch mm-fix-alloc_bootmem_core-to-use-fast-searching-for-all-nodes.patch mm-allocate-section_map-for-sparse_init.patch mm-allocate-section_map-for-sparse_init-update.patch mm-allocate-section_map-for-sparse_init-update-fix.patch mm-allocate-section_map-for-sparse_init-powerpc-fix.patch mm-offset-align-in-alloc_bootmem.patch mm-make-reserve_bootmem-can-crossed-the-nodes.patch mm-make-reserve_bootmem-can-crossed-the-nodes-checkpatch-fixes.patch and you purport to throw some of them away and combine them into a single patch? We assume that the later patches will still apply and work on top of this newer patch? It is up to me to check that the replacement patch incorporates the third-party changes to the original patches? Too hard, too risky. Can't we just do a fix against 2.6.25-rc8-mm1? _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
