On Wed, 2015-01-28 at 14:14 -0600, Kim Phillips wrote:

On Wed, 28 Jan 2015 14:22:02 +1100
Michael Ellerman [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Tue, 2015-01-27 at 18:57 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:

quoted

On Wed, 28 Jan 2015 10:33:59 +0900 Joonsoo Kim [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

2015-01-28 10:01 GMT+09:00 Michael Ellerman [off-list ref]:

quoted

On Mon, 2015-01-26 at 13:22 -0600, Kim Phillips wrote:

quoted

arch/powerpc has __kernel_map_pages implementations in mm/pgtable_32.c, and

I'd be happy to take this through the powerpc tree for 3.20, but for this:

quoted

depends on:
From: Joonsoo Kim <redacted>
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2015 10:28:58 +0900
Subject: [PATCH] mm/debug_pagealloc: fix build failure on ppc and some other archs

I don't have that patch in my tree.

But in what way does this patch depend on that one?

It looks to me like it'd be safe to take this on its own, or am I wrong?

Hello,

These two patches are merged to Andrew's tree now.

That didn't answer either of Michael's questions ;)

Yes, I think they're independent.  I was holding off on the powerpc

sorry - my bad, they are indeed completely independent.

 
No worries.

quoted

quoted

one, waiting to see if it popped up in linux-next via your tree.  I can
merge both if you like?

Right, I didn't think I'd seen it in your tree :)

I'm happy to take this one, saves a possible merge conflict.

I'm fine either way (I work on linux-next).

Cool. It's in my next as of now, so should be in linux-next tomorrow (30th).

cheers