Re: linux-next: manual merge of the cputime tree

[Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>]

Hi Stephen,

On Mon, 2008-11-10 at 17:09 +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Today's linux-next merge of the cputime tree got a conflict in
> arch/s390/kernel/process.c between commit
> 2933aa2758dc5e520f83a5f4c3f255aea297bd3f ("[S390] ftrace: disable tracing
> on idle psw") from the s390 tree and commit
> bbda3e73a200e966955b15a08a8be05a7c1d430e ("[PATCH] improve precision of
> idle accounting") from the cputime tree.
> 
> I attempted a fix (see below) but please either provide me with a better
> patch or fix this conflict in one or the other tree.  You could do this
> by merging the s390 tree into the cputime tree (but you would need to be
> careful to keep the consistent) and fixing this in the merge commit.

You are pulling the s390 tree first and then the cputime tree, no? Then
I could simply rebase the cputime tree off the s390 tree. You'll find
new features/cputime branches on git390.

-- 
blue skies,
  Martin.

"Reality continues to ruin my life." - Calvin.