From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the rr tree Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 10:20:34 +0100 Message-ID: <20090106092034.GA30657@elte.hu> References: <20090105143239.08b1a060.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <200901051727.11403.rusty@rustcorp.com.au> <20090105124745.GC29758@elte.hu> <200901061921.49131.rusty@rustcorp.com.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mx3.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.1.138]:37725 "EHLO mx3.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751559AbZAFJVB (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Jan 2009 04:21:01 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200901061921.49131.rusty@rustcorp.com.au> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Rusty Russell Cc: Stephen Rothwell , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, Mike Travis , Christoph Lameter , Thomas Gleixner , "H. Peter Anvin" * Rusty Russell wrote: > On Monday 05 January 2009 23:17:45 Ingo Molnar wrote: > > That would allow Mike, Christoph and you to work this out cleanly from > > scratch. It would also solve your merge conflict. > > > > Does that sound like a good solution? > > Sure, but it won't make this window. I guess since those patches don't > do anything but lay groundwork it's not critical, but annoying they've > lain fallow so long. > > I'm happy to put them with the cpualloc patches, since they're related > and going to conflict, but I still want to see if Mike has the rest of > them? ok, i've zapped them from tip/core/percpu and will let you and Mike handle them. Ingo