From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753240AbZAETuY (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Jan 2009 14:50:24 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753478AbZAETty (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Jan 2009 14:49:54 -0500 Received: from outbound-mail-21.bluehost.com ([69.89.21.16]:39477 "HELO outbound-mail-21.bluehost.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1753402AbZAETtx (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Jan 2009 14:49:53 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=default; d=virtuousgeek.org; h=Received:From:To:Subject:Date:User-Agent:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Disposition:Message-Id:X-Identified-User; b=cWlvgq1jIqbK5D5vMwcnPDUkaTKL2Bxxvg1Scc56wL819Zysr4Ns9Fg9iGWjLqY97m4sh4jDq1eK6w1d4QedbLoWg2RMe1WYfewfum86/qK6+uwLAgsfTniUdMMCSnvD; From: Jesse Barnes To: Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/11] cpumask: update pci_bus_show_cpuaffinity to use new cpumask API Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 11:49:49 -0800 User-Agent: KMail/1.10.1 (Linux/2.6.27.9-73.fc9.x86_64; KDE/4.1.3; x86_64; ; ) Cc: Mike Travis , Ingo Molnar , Rusty Russell , "H. Peter Anvin" , Thomas Gleixner , Jack Steiner , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20090104131759.865331000@polaris-admin.engr.sgi.com> <200901051127.03598.jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200901051149.50337.jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org> X-Identified-User: {642:box128.bluehost.com:virtuous:virtuousgeek.org} {sentby:smtp auth 75.111.27.49 authed with jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org} Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Monday, January 5, 2009 11:44 am Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Mon, 5 Jan 2009, Jesse Barnes wrote: > > Can you resend these two against my linux-next branch? > > Btw, Jesse, what's the schedule for merging the pci thing. Just pulling together some more patches today; was planning on sending a pull request tomorrow. > I'm currently planning on -rc1 next weekend, which gives us time to do at > least a shortened -rc2 before people are at LCA. And the suspend/resume > changes are some of the more "exciting" (aka scary) parts of the whole > merge window, so I'd rather get them merged with a few days to go, rather > than just before -rc1. > > In fact, they are probably more scary than the cpumask changes, since at > least the cpumask issues are likely to not be a big deal with any normal > sane config (ie you really do have to enable MAXSMP to hit the stack usage > issues). So if you end up waiting for those, I'd rather prefer to first > merge the rest of the PCI code. Yeah, they're no big deal, just wanted to get them (the cpumask changes) queued up... > Or did the PCI late-suspend/early-resume patches go in somebody elses > tree and I'm barking up the wrong tree entirely? No they're coming through my tree; just need to ping Rafael again and get the latest set. Thanks, -- Jesse Barnes, Intel Open Source Technology Center