On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 08:43:01AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 05/23/2014 08:34 AM, Will Deacon wrote:
> > 
> > There is also a documentation patch [1] in this series but, again, I didn't
> > CC everybody on it. Sorry, but the level of interest this sort of stuff
> > generates amongst kernel developers is close to zero so I only included
> > people I thought cared on CC for the entire series. I'm stuck between a rock
> > and a hard place trying to CC interested people whilst at the same time
> > trying to avoid spamming all the arch maintainers.
> > 
> 
> If you are sending me a patch, please include me on the cover letter for
> the patch series.  You don't have to send me the entire patch series
> (although for something like a Documentation patch which affects x86 I
> would consider including the union list as well.)
> 
> I think regardless of level of interest, the definition of
> cross-architectural operations is exactly the arch maintainers job, so
> it isn't really out of place to "spam" us...

So the one issue I had with that, is that if one tries to send an email
to all arch maintainers + linux-arch + linux-kernel, the header gets too
big and vger chokes and davem slaps you.

So while its possibly desirable to do big unions with 0/xx and the like,
its practically infeasible.