Hello Mike,
I haven't read your patch text yet. I am waiting for the subsystem
maintainers response at least
about the necessity to have this type of changes being merged into the
sources (I mean
memblock/no-bootmem alteration). If they find it pointless (although I
would strongly disagree), then
nothing to discuss. Otherwise we can come up with a solution.

-Sergey


On Thu, Aug 2, 2018 at 2:56 PM Mike Rapoport [off-list ref]
wrote:

Hi,

On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 10:55:53PM +0300, Fancer's opinion wrote:

quoted

Hello, folks
Regarding the no_bootmem patchset I've sent earlier.
I'm terribly sorry about huge delay with response. I got sucked in a new
project, so just didn't have a time to proceed with the series, answer

to the

quoted

questions and resend the set.
If it is still relevant and needed for community, I can get back to the

series

quoted

on the next week, answer to the Mett's questions (sorry, man, for doing

it so

quoted

long), rebase it on top of the kernel 4.18 and resend the new version.

We also

quoted

can try to combine it with this patch, if it is found convenient.

So, what would be the best way to move forward?

quoted

Regards,
-Sergey


On Thu, 26 Jul 2018, 20:20 Paul Burton, [off-list ref] wrote:

    Hi Mike,

    On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 10:03:56AM +0300, Mike Rapoport wrote:
    > Any comments on this?

    I haven't looked at this in detail yet, but there was a much larger
    series submitted to accomplish this not too long ago, which needed
    another revision:

https://patchwork.linux-mips.org/project/linux-mips/list/?series=787&

quoted

    state=*

    Given that, I'd be (pleasantly) surprised if this one smaller patch

is

quoted

    enough.

    Thanks,
        Paul

--
Sincerely yours,
Mike.