From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Borislav Petkov Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the rcu tree with Linus' tree Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2011 15:14:26 +0200 Message-ID: <20110927131426.GA21897@aftab> References: <20110927151454.9892b23391f20bea20741c21@canb.auug.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Return-path: Received: from ch1ehsobe003.messaging.microsoft.com ([216.32.181.183]:57603 "EHLO ch1outboundpool.messaging.microsoft.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752090Ab1I0NQV (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Sep 2011 09:16:21 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110927151454.9892b23391f20bea20741c21@canb.auug.org.au> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Stephen Rothwell Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" , "linux-next@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Hidetoshi Seto , Frederic Weisbecker On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 01:14:54AM -0400, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi Paul, > > Today's linux-next merge of the rcu tree got a conflict in > arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mcheck/mce.c between commit b77e70bf3535 ("x86, mce: > Replace MCE_SELF_VECTOR by irq_work") from Linus' tree and commit > ef14aea88fee ("x86: Call idle notifier after irq_enter()") from the rcu > tree. > > The commit in Linus' tree seem to superced the need for the rcu tree > patch ... so I effectively dropped the rcu tree change to this file. Yes, this is correct. @Frederic, Paul: you guys could probably redo the patch without the hunk or leave it like this and let Linus know about the conflict when sending the pull request during the merge window... Thanks. -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. Advanced Micro Devices GmbH Einsteinring 24, 85609 Dornach GM: Alberto Bozzo Reg: Dornach, Landkreis Muenchen HRB Nr. 43632 WEEE Registernr: 129 19551