From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758239Ab3CTQkW (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Mar 2013 12:40:22 -0400 Received: from mail-pb0-f53.google.com ([209.85.160.53]:57259 "EHLO mail-pb0-f53.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752066Ab3CTQkV (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Mar 2013 12:40:21 -0400 Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2013 09:40:15 -0700 From: Tejun Heo To: Lai Jiangshan Cc: Lai Jiangshan , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/21] workqueue: cleanups and better locking for recent changes Message-ID: <20130320164015.GA3042@htj.dyndns.org> References: <1363721306-2030-1-git-send-email-laijs@cn.fujitsu.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hey, On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 12:38:17AM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote: > I am sorry for replying so late and replied with so huge patchset. > > But problem happened now, my patches and your patches are conflict. > Which patchset should be rebased? > > I think my patches need be merged at first. Thus workqueue code is > in a better base, then your patchset will be rebased on this base. > > Since you are maintainer, your choice will be much reasonable. > If you do any choice, please let me know earlier. > > I should write patches after you are done, even cleanups. Let me first look at your patches. I don't really care either way and don't expect too many conflicts from the two patchsets anyway. The NUMA thing is pretty isolated in several functions after all. Even if there are conflicts, they shouldn't be too difficult to resolve. Anyways, will review soon. Thanks. -- tejun