On Tue, Feb 04, 2020 at 09:45:24AM +0100, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> I really hope we'll find more reviewers in general - I'm also not happy
> if my patches go upstream with little/no review. However, patches
> shouldn't be stuck for multiple merge windows in linux-next IMHO
> (excluding
>> I can understand this is desirable (yet, I am
>> not sure if this makes sense with the current take-and-not-give-back
>> review mentality on this list).
>>
>> Although it will make upstreaming stuff *even harder* and *even slower*,
>> maybe we should start to only queue patches that have an
On Fri, 31 Jan 2020 10:18:34 +0100 David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 31.01.20 05:40, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Tue, 3 Dec 2019 14:36:38 +0100 Oscar Salvador wrote:
> >
> >> On Mon, Dec 02, 2019 at 10:09:51AM +0100, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> >>> @Michal, @Oscar, can some of you at least have a
>>> The first patch has reviews, the remainder are unloved.
>>
>> Trying hard not to rant about the review mentality on this list, but I'm
>> afraid I can't totally bite my tongue ... :)
>
> I am afraid this is less about mentality than the lack of man power.
> This is not a new problem. We have
On Fri 31-01-20 10:18:34, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 31.01.20 05:40, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Tue, 3 Dec 2019 14:36:38 +0100 Oscar Salvador wrote:
> >
> >> On Mon, Dec 02, 2019 at 10:09:51AM +0100, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> >>> @Michal, @Oscar, can some of you at least have a patch #5 now
On 31.01.20 05:40, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Dec 2019 14:36:38 +0100 Oscar Salvador wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Dec 02, 2019 at 10:09:51AM +0100, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>>> @Michal, @Oscar, can some of you at least have a patch #5 now so we can
>>> proceed with that? (the other patches can stay
On Tue, 3 Dec 2019 14:36:38 +0100 Oscar Salvador wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 02, 2019 at 10:09:51AM +0100, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> > @Michal, @Oscar, can some of you at least have a patch #5 now so we can
> > proceed with that? (the other patches can stay in -next some time longer)
>
> Hi,
>
> I
On Mon, Dec 02, 2019 at 10:09:51AM +0100, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> @Michal, @Oscar, can some of you at least have a patch #5 now so we can
> proceed with that? (the other patches can stay in -next some time longer)
Hi,
I will be having a look at patch#5 shortly.
Thanks for the reminder
--
On 06.10.19 10:56, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> This series fixes the access of uninitialized memmaps when shrinking
> zones/nodes and when removing memory. Also, it contains all fixes for
> crashes that can be triggered when removing certain namespace using
> memunmap_pages() - ZONE_DEVICE,
