diff for duplicates of <200701310135.43383.arnd@arndb.de> diff --git a/a/1.txt b/N1/1.txt index af8a84f..6fc5d4b 100644 --- a/a/1.txt +++ b/N1/1.txt @@ -1,17 +1,13 @@ On Tuesday 30 January 2007 16:31, Maynard Johnson wrote: ->=20 +> > > On solution would be to move the notify_active flag from ctx->spu > > into ctx itself, but maybe there are other ways to solve this. -> In an earlier review of this patch, Christopher Hellwig suggested I move= -=20 -> the notify_active flag to be a bit in the sched_flags field that's added= -=20 -> in his scheduler patch series. =A0If this patch series will be a availabl= -e=20 -> in an "Arnd" tree that we'll be using for our current OProfile=20 -> development, perhaps I should wait until that time to change this, since= -=20 -> the window of vulnerability is quite small. =A0What do you think? +> In an earlier review of this patch, Christopher Hellwig suggested I move +> the notify_active flag to be a bit in the sched_flags field that's added +> in his scheduler patch series. If this patch series will be a available +> in an "Arnd" tree that we'll be using for our current OProfile +> development, perhaps I should wait until that time to change this, since +> the window of vulnerability is quite small. What do you think? Sounds good to me. diff --git a/a/content_digest b/N1/content_digest index c5709eb..7629558 100644 --- a/a/content_digest +++ b/N1/content_digest @@ -5,29 +5,25 @@ "Subject\0Re: [Cbe-oss-dev] [RFC, PATCH 3/4] Add support to OProfile for profiling Cell BE SPUs -- update\0" "Date\0Wed, 31 Jan 2007 01:35:42 +0100\0" "To\0maynardj@us.ibm.com\0" - "Cc\0linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org" - cbe-oss-dev@ozlabs.org - oprofile-list@lists.sourceforge.net - " linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org\0" + "Cc\0cbe-oss-dev@ozlabs.org" + linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org + linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org + " oprofile-list@lists.sourceforge.net\0" "\00:1\0" "b\0" "On Tuesday 30 January 2007 16:31, Maynard Johnson wrote:\n" - ">=20\n" + "> \n" "> > On solution would be to move the notify_active flag from ctx->spu\n" "> > into ctx itself, but maybe there are other ways to solve this.\n" - "> In an earlier review of this patch, Christopher Hellwig suggested I move=\n" - "=20\n" - "> the notify_active flag to be a bit in the sched_flags field that's added=\n" - "=20\n" - "> in his scheduler patch series. =A0If this patch series will be a availabl=\n" - "e=20\n" - "> in an \"Arnd\" tree that we'll be using for our current OProfile=20\n" - "> development, perhaps I should wait until that time to change this, since=\n" - "=20\n" - "> the window of vulnerability is quite small. =A0What do you think?\n" + "> In an earlier review of this patch, Christopher Hellwig suggested I move \n" + "> the notify_active flag to be a bit in the sched_flags field that's added \n" + "> in his scheduler patch series. \302\240If this patch series will be a available \n" + "> in an \"Arnd\" tree that we'll be using for our current OProfile \n" + "> development, perhaps I should wait until that time to change this, since \n" + "> the window of vulnerability is quite small. \302\240What do you think?\n" "\n" "Sounds good to me.\n" "\n" "\tArnd <><" -344ac06e2f523785b5f14ac229dc7f36dce3eff9a67ce7a405c0482553cb59aa +a6939c06c59f4c2e0373ac22bfd6446f5bec28596833892f77dcad14868a411a
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.