From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the sched tree Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2008 08:08:14 +0200 Message-ID: <20080701060814.GD14658@elte.hu> References: <20080701124206.77ff77cd.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <20080701055402.GA14658@elte.hu> <20080701160016.0fa899e4.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mx2.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.151.9]:43082 "EHLO mx2.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751623AbYGAGIa (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Jul 2008 02:08:30 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080701160016.0fa899e4.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Stephen Rothwell Cc: Thomas Gleixner , "H. Peter Anvin" , linux-next@vger.kernel.org * Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi Ingo, > > On Tue, 1 Jul 2008 07:54:02 +0200 Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > You should be able to check whether we both integrated the conflict the > > same way via checking tip/auto-latest, which is the integration of all > > the auto branches that come from -tip. > > > > All the integration branches of -tip are pushed out at once so > > tip/auto-latest always gives a hint about how to integrate two -tip > > derived topic branches, tip/auto-latest always gives an answer. [ which > > might at times be wrong so it never hurts to double check :-) Note: > > auto-latest also includes some non-linux-next topics - but they dont > > affect the scheduler usually. ] > > Good to know, I will fetch it when necessary to check my work. we could also add tip/auto-next, which would be the integration of strictly the topics that go towards linux-next. You probably dont want to use it for linux-next because it's too large hence you'd lose flexibility in shaping the ordering of trees (and lose flexibility in excluding broken trees and iterating them out of sync) - but it would be useful for the normal case and it might also speed up / strengthen your conflict resolution workflow. Ingo