From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the kmemcheck tree Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2008 10:17:00 +0200 Message-ID: <20080815081700.GA4776@elte.hu> References: <20080815164512.3f36d7a6.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <48A525A3.8050705@cs.helsinki.fi> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mx2.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.151.9]:55253 "EHLO mx2.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751600AbYHOIR0 (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Aug 2008 04:17:26 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <48A525A3.8050705@cs.helsinki.fi> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Pekka Enberg Cc: Stephen Rothwell , Vegard Nossum , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, "Gustavo F. Padovan" * Pekka Enberg wrote: > Stephen Rothwell wrote: >> Today's linux-next merge of the kmemcheck tree got a conflict in >> arch/x86/kernel/process_64.c between commits >> 8092c654de9a964c14d89da56834f73a80548a58 ("x86: add KERN_INFO to printks >> on process_64.c") and 7de08b4e1ed8d80e6086f71b7e99fc4b397aae39 ("x86: >> coding styles fixes to arch/x86/kernel/process_64.c") from the x86 tree >> and commit afdb7023b849cffda679fcec324ff592d7b24a51 ("x86: >> __show_registers() and __show_regs() API unification") from the kmemcheck >> tree. > > Ingo, can we push the unification patch to mainline before kmemcheck > to get rid of the conflict? hm, i think it's too late for that. The 130+ arch/x86 contributors were very busy in this cycle too [1300+ commits (!)] so we need to slow down during -rc's much harder and much sooner than other, lower-flux subsystems. Furthermore, this particular piece of code is not in a high-flux area so git-rerere should properly take care of it i think, even in the longer run. I've been carrying that merge fixup in tip/master for a long time. Ingo