Re: [patch 1/6] mm: Allow architectures to define additional protection bits

On Tue, 2008-07-08 at 16:18 +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:

Andrew, what tree should this go via ? I have further powerpc patches
depending on this one... so on one hand I'd be happy to take it, but
on the other hand, it's more likely to clash with other things...

Andrew has asked that it go through Paul, which now means you.

"It'd be simpler if Paul were to merge this.  It doesn't conflict with
any pending work."
http://ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev/2008-July/058948.html

Maybe I should check how it applies on top of linux-next.

Looks pretty clean:

patching file include/linux/mman.h
patching file mm/mmap.c
patching file mm/mprotect.c
Hunk #1 succeeded at 237 (offset -2 lines).

Thanks,
Shaggy
-- 
David Kleikamp
IBM Linux Technology Center