From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tejun Heo Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the workqueues tree with the Linus' tree Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2010 13:45:16 +0200 Message-ID: <4C4980CC.7070909@kernel.org> References: <20100723144600.dd4da992.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <4C497CD5.5010908@kernel.org> <20100723213148.3d2193a3.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <4C497E5F.80301@kernel.org> <20100723214233.7cb7de8d.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: linux-next-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, David Howells , Steve French , linux-cifs-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Stephen Rothwell Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20100723214233.7cb7de8d.sfr-3FnU+UHB4dNDw9hX6IcOSA@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-cifs-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-ID: Hello, On 07/23/2010 01:42 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 13:34:55 +0200 Tejun Heo wrote: >> >> I was thinking about sending pull request w/ a note describing how to >> resolve the conflict. Would pulling in master before requesting pull >> be better? > > Either would work. Linus is fine with doing merge fixups and, after all, > I figured it out. :-) > > A description always helps, of course. Yeah, sorry about causng headaches in linux-next. I'll test merge w/ mainline and let you know non-trivial conflicts for future commits. Thank you. -- tejun