From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tejun Heo Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the percpu tree with the asm-generic tree Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2016 22:01:26 +0200 Message-ID: <20160927200126.GA16429@mtj.duckdns.org> References: <20160927135434.0040b41c@canb.auug.org.au> <201609272159.32261.arnd@arndb.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mail-wm0-f42.google.com ([74.125.82.42]:35382 "EHLO mail-wm0-f42.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S934274AbcI0UBa (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Sep 2016 16:01:30 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <201609272159.32261.arnd@arndb.de> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Arnd Bergmann Cc: Stephen Rothwell , Rusty Russell , Christoph Lameter , Ingo Molnar , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Chunyan Zhang , Nicholas Piggin Hello, Arnd. On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 09:59:32PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > The merge solution seems correct, but this is one of only two trivial > patches I have queued up for asm-generic this time, so I wonder if we could > put the _notrace patch into the percpu tree that already has the > raw_cpu_generic_read change to avoid the conflict. I'll be happy to pick it up. Can you please send me the patch refreshed on top of percpu/for-4.9? Thanks. -- tejun