From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pd0-f177.google.com (mail-pd0-f177.google.com [209.85.192.177]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C38E56B0035 for ; Wed, 16 Oct 2013 22:41:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-pd0-f177.google.com with SMTP id p10so155113pdj.36 for ; Wed, 16 Oct 2013 19:41:30 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <525F4E17.6070302@asianux.com> Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2013 10:40:23 +0800 From: Chen Gang MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/readahead.c: need always return 0 when system call readahead() succeeds References: <5212E328.40804@asianux.com> <20130820161639.69ffa65b40c5cf761bbb727c@linux-foundation.org> <521428D0.2020708@asianux.com> <20130917155644.cc988e7e929fee10e9c86d86@linux-foundation.org> <52390907.7050101@asianux.com> <525CF787.6050107@asianux.com> <525F35F7.4070202@asianux.com> <525F3E39.3060603@asianux.com> <525F4D4C.2090002@asianux.com> In-Reply-To: <525F4D4C.2090002@asianux.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: David Rientjes Cc: Andrew Morton , Al Viro , Mel Gorman , sasha.levin@oracle.com, linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk, kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com, Wu Fengguang , lczerner@redhat.com, linux-mm@kvack.org On 10/17/2013 10:37 AM, Chen Gang wrote: > On 10/17/2013 10:21 AM, David Rientjes wrote: >> On Thu, 17 Oct 2013, Chen Gang wrote: >> >>>> I think your patches should be acked before being merged into linux-next, >>>> Hugh just had to revert another one that did affect Linus's tree in >>>> 1ecfd533f4c5 ("mm/mremap.c: call pud_free() after fail calling >>>> pmd_alloc()"). I had to revert your entire series of mpol_to_str() >>>> changes in -mm. It's getting ridiculous and a waste of other people's >>>> time. >>>> >>> >>> If always get no reply, what to do, next? >>> >> >> If nobody ever acks your patches, they probably aren't that important. At >> the very least, something that nobody has looked at shouldn't be included >> if it's going to introduce a regression. >> Or, need I provide 1-3 patches to let us evaluate whether they are 'important' or not? > > At least, that is not quite polite. > > And when get conclusion, please based on the proofs: "is it necessary to > list them to check whether they are 'important' or not"? > > >>> But all together, I welcome you to help ack/nack my patches for mm >>> sub-system (although I don't know your ack/nack whether have effect or not). >>> >> >> If it touches mm, then there is someone on this list who can ack it and >> you can cc them by looking at the output of scripts/get_maintainer.pl. If >> nobody is interested in it, or if it doesn't do anything important, nobody >> is going to spend their time reviewing it. >> > > Of cause, every time, I send patch according to "scripts/get_maintainer.pl". > > So again: "is it necessary to list them to check whether they are > 'important' or not?" > > >> I'm not going to continue this thread, the patch in question has been >> removed from -mm so I have no further interest in discussing it. >> >> > > OK, end discussing if you no reply. > > Thanks. > -- Chen Gang -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org