From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Avi Kivity Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the kvm tree Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2009 10:19:51 +0300 Message-ID: <4A320197.1070504@redhat.com> References: <20090612125745.afadf2aa.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:36117 "EHLO mx2.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753611AbZFLHUW (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Jun 2009 03:20:22 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20090612125745.afadf2aa.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Stephen Rothwell Cc: linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 06/12/2009 05:57 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi Avi, > > Today's linux-next merge of the kvm tree got conflicts in about 23 > files. This has happened because only a subset of the kvm tree that is > merged into the linux-next tree has been merged into Linus' tree *and* > that subset was rebased before the merge happened. > > I have dropped the kvm tree. > I'll merge asap. > Is there some other branch that I should be including in linux-next > instead of the current one i.e. something that represents what you will > actually send to Linus that doesn't need to be rebased before that > happens? > There's always kvm-updates/2.6.n+1, but that doesn't get updates until the merge window gets close. -- Do not meddle in the internals of kernels, for they are subtle and quick to panic.