@manu: I don't have any active src commit bit anymore (only ports commit bit). Am I allowed to commit the changes to src and mention you approved them?

In D36954#847655, @dumbbell wrote:

@manu: I don't have any active src commit bit anymore (only ports commit bit). Am I allowed to commit the changes to src and mention you approved them?

That won't work, we can reactivate your commit bit (I think you just need to send a mail to core@ and I can mentor you for some time so you can adapt to the new process, which isn't really different since you lost your commit bit) or I'll just commit your work.
But since you have quite some bit of linuxkpi work now I guess it's easier to reactivate your commit bit ?

In D36954#847657, @manu wrote:

In D36954#847655, @dumbbell wrote:

@manu: I don't have any active src commit bit anymore (only ports commit bit). Am I allowed to commit the changes to src and mention you approved them?

That won't work, we can reactivate your commit bit (I think you just need to send a mail to core@ and I can mentor you for some time so you can adapt to the new process, which isn't really different since you lost your commit bit) or I'll just commit your work.
But since you have quite some bit of linuxkpi work now I guess it's easier to reactivate your commit bit ?

To be clear *I* would need to send an email to core@ if you want you commit bit reactivated.
Oh and I missed that you still have a ports commit bit so yes you can commit those you will have access.
And you can consider my accepted reviews as accepted for you to commit to src.

And you can consider my accepted reviews as accepted for you to commit to src.

And I suspect reactivating your src bit is just a formality after that.

sys/compat/linuxkpi/common/include/linux/gfp.h
46	It's too bad we don't have a comment explaining (ignoring of) these flags, of course that's independent of your change. At least the `_NO` flags make sense to ignore if we don't implement the behaviour anyway.