Received: by 2002:ac0:a5a7:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id m36-v6csp101563imm; Thu, 26 Jul 2018 14:47:09 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpf8TmDudth2dl+DMfTj5ijDODbyNQPsi5KnDsATA7WaPgkjTw3NE2g+AGNlmpKC9Z0Q8byC X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:8306:: with SMTP id bd6-v6mr3540509plb.120.1532641629585; Thu, 26 Jul 2018 14:47:09 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1532641629; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=Hb+cWAmg6V3H9nUB3e/h71/RdBDB+Zu34fu0yU/2n3CMvsKRPHBgMq/ThByzIxv9ri TvCZLYUvIYETYR78BGGNz75MGY4sjCCOAMNNaWxW9mpnU3rrJfJcJ2rbAi7Nne4FxTKS 1i4yYRFfFS4IjIH8IygTgds0Kk9OtkLoQdOhzRVS5fEHuMPfbFr3aN8RfACS7wbnaeb2 7vEpeQ99KVRixgrARDX09X6AqN0k959B6gqMWvTXBufVu0D10x+hyPoY0XuHlIfDGy7O RheVQs5nZ6JPRwc2fJHb9h0anmODP6BRVM5QKsms4izeORd0Z7ZfkOJGIUM0+QQD+ngq GzKA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version :organization:references:in-reply-to:message-id:subject:cc:to:from :date:arc-authentication-results; bh=vBWPmJl8aF11/DVHEfy9akHb4ehmPBinACFLGW0kO9w=; b=r5CgpErXc08G9CPie7T8BLJCmdbTF1Z2XoINxgcpCBIzQD25p2wf5xYpkONy/ScNSg 2Tia/d3ycGPXb9Ddjqc8262XFto0emMSktsqm7IWOs8agu0KuycTdkc1vjB8mLp0ke7B FzxHquGL0sULNeua4ad6ivY8RSNJsAtNy4AkS7Ljb9NEX3cpudID4ZeXCYfxz78OAFRu 4AXJqLa7c+qaEPzt6h4KB02ygPHD0IgfXUFUCyqOb1BF6Hx7K426JxLrZXzA2AFFMnrw JxagtXq7yeqbHYZv3M9PpDfLwPIELl80u4MzF3fZmX3cn6m+9UAIUjQi212VLMt0+HPb VJXg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id j10-v6si2059590pgi.500.2018.07.26.14.46.52; Thu, 26 Jul 2018 14:47:09 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1731550AbeGZXEl (ORCPT + 99 others); Thu, 26 Jul 2018 19:04:41 -0400 Received: from ms.lwn.net ([45.79.88.28]:34354 "EHLO ms.lwn.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1730701AbeGZXEl (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Jul 2018 19:04:41 -0400 Received: from lwn.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ms.lwn.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 25DED2D9; Thu, 26 Jul 2018 21:45:58 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2018 15:45:57 -0600 From: Jonathan Corbet To: Mike Rapoport Cc: Andrew Morton , Randy Dunlap , linux-doc , linux-mm , lkml Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/11] docs/mm: add boot time memory management docs Message-ID: <20180726154557.7a1677d8@lwn.net> In-Reply-To: <20180718170043.GA23770@rapoport-lnx> References: <1530370506-21751-1-git-send-email-rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20180702113255.1f7504e2@lwn.net> <20180718114730.GD4302@rapoport-lnx> <20180718060249.6b45605d@lwn.net> <20180718170043.GA23770@rapoport-lnx> Organization: LWN.net MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 18 Jul 2018 20:00:43 +0300 Mike Rapoport wrote: > > Michal acked #11 (the docs patch) in particular but not the series as a > > whole. But it's the rest of the series that I was most worried about :) > > I'm happy for the patches to take either path, but I'd really like an > > explicit ack before I apply that many changes directly to the MM code... > > Andrew, > > Can you please take a look at this series? The thread starts at [1] and if > it'd be more convenient to you I can respin the whole set. It seems this hasn't happened - at least, I don't see the patches in linux-next. Unless somebody says something I think I'll just go ahead and merge the set. It all still applies cleanly enough, no conflicts against -next, and I'd hate to see this work fall through the cracks. jon