* Christoph Lameter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 9 Jan 2008, Dave Hansen wrote:
>
> > Then I really think this particular patch belongs in that other
> > patch set. Here, it makes very little sense, and it's on the end
> > anyway.
>
> It makes sense in that both percpu_32/64 are very small as a result of
> earlier patches and so its justifiable to put them together to
> simplify the next patchset.
i'd agree with this - lets just keep the existing flow of patches
intact. It's not like the percpu code is in any danger of becoming
unclean or quirky - it's one of the best-maintained pieces of kernel
code :)
Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
