On Sat, May 23, 2015 at 7:12 AM, h...@lst.de wrote:
> On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 06:35:55PM +, Williams, Dan J wrote:
>> Jens, I'm wondering if you want to take this series(.) as patches or
>> prepare a git branch to pull?
>
> Honestly I don't think it should go anyway. It makes a big mess of
>
On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 06:35:55PM +, Williams, Dan J wrote:
> Jens, I'm wondering if you want to take this series(.) as patches or
> prepare a git branch to pull?
Honestly I don't think it should go anyway. It makes a big mess of
a structure without providing a real user for it. Given how
On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 06:35:55PM +, Williams, Dan J wrote:
Jens, I'm wondering if you want to take this series(.) as patches or
prepare a git branch to pull?
Honestly I don't think it should go anyway. It makes a big mess of
a structure without providing a real user for it. Given how we
On Sat, May 23, 2015 at 7:12 AM, h...@lst.de h...@lst.de wrote:
On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 06:35:55PM +, Williams, Dan J wrote:
Jens, I'm wondering if you want to take this series(.) as patches or
prepare a git branch to pull?
Honestly I don't think it should go anyway. It makes a big mess
On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 9:10 PM, Vinod Koul wrote:
> On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 06:35:55PM +, Williams, Dan J wrote:
>> [ adding willy (yes, need to fix my scripts), and dmaengine folks]
>>
>> Jens, Christoph,
>>
>> I've rebased this patch series block/for-next. With commit 84be456f883c
>>
On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 9:10 PM, Vinod Koul vinod.k...@intel.com wrote:
On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 06:35:55PM +, Williams, Dan J wrote:
[ adding willy (yes, need to fix my scripts), and dmaengine folks]
Jens, Christoph,
I've rebased this patch series block/for-next. With commit
On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 06:35:55PM +, Williams, Dan J wrote:
> [ adding willy (yes, need to fix my scripts), and dmaengine folks]
>
> Jens, Christoph,
>
> I've rebased this patch series block/for-next. With commit 84be456f883c
> "remove " I think we can take the next step of
> removing all
On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 06:35:55PM +, Williams, Dan J wrote:
[ adding willy (yes, need to fix my scripts), and dmaengine folks]
Jens, Christoph,
I've rebased this patch series block/for-next. With commit 84be456f883c
remove asm/scatterlist.h I think we can take the next step of
[ adding willy (yes, need to fix my scripts), and dmaengine folks]
Jens, Christoph,
I've rebased this patch series block/for-next. With commit 84be456f883c
"remove " I think we can take the next step of
removing all references to page_link and just use __pfn_t by default.
v4 patch below.
Jens,
[ adding willy (yes, need to fix my scripts), and dmaengine folks]
Jens, Christoph,
I've rebased this patch series block/for-next. With commit 84be456f883c
remove asm/scatterlist.h I think we can take the next step of
removing all references to page_link and just use __pfn_t by default.
v4
From: Matthew Wilcox
Given that an offset will never be more than PAGE_SIZE, steal the unused
bits of the offset to implement a flags field. Move the existing "this
is a sg_chain() entry" flag to the new flags field, and add a new flag
(SG_FLAGS_PAGE) to indicate that there is a struct page
From: Matthew Wilcox wi...@linux.intel.com
Given that an offset will never be more than PAGE_SIZE, steal the unused
bits of the offset to implement a flags field. Move the existing this
is a sg_chain() entry flag to the new flags field, and add a new flag
(SG_FLAGS_PAGE) to indicate that there
12 matches
Mail list logo
