From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mike Travis Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the rr_cpumask tree Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2008 08:03:11 -0800 Message-ID: <4947D13F.6020105@sgi.com> References: <20081215170945.b91f3b9c.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <200812151711.36134.rusty@rustcorp.com.au> <4946855D.7070403@sgi.com> <200812161610.58496.rusty@rustcorp.com.au> <49474471.2090409@sgi.com> <20081216170940.3c74d4d0.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from relay2.sgi.com ([192.48.179.30]:48519 "EHLO relay.sgi.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756275AbYLPQDO (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Dec 2008 11:03:14 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20081216170940.3c74d4d0.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Stephen Rothwell Cc: Rusty Russell , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, Yinghai Lu , Ingo Molnar Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi Mike, > > On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 22:02:25 -0800 Mike Travis wrote: >> Yes, I did finally figure that out. Thanks for rebasing the part that Ingo needed >> so maybe the rest can be pushed. There was a problem when the 'for-ingo' tree was >> merged as there were mixed up API calls in io_apic.c, but I fixed them in the first >> x86 only patch. I wasn't sure of what else to do. > > You could have fixed them up as part of the actual merge commit. If each > tree was correct on it own, then the merge is the place for such > resolutions. > Thanks, I will try that next time. Ingo - if you need a small patch to make the post-merge tree buildable, let me know. I can extract that from the 1st patch (that modifies the smp api). Thanks, Mike