From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tejun Heo Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the lost-spurious-irq tree with the tip tree Date: Tue, 05 Oct 2010 08:59:13 +0200 Message-ID: <4CAACCC1.6000000@kernel.org> References: <20101005141334.6a0f15fd.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <4CAABC0E.3030700@kernel.org> <20101005063227.GB12267@elte.hu> <4CAACBDA.6090308@kernel.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <4CAACBDA.6090308@kernel.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Stephen Rothwell , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner , "H. Peter Anvin" , Peter Zijlstra List-Id: linux-next.vger.kernel.org On 10/05/2010 08:55 AM, Tejun Heo wrote: > I think Stephen had done enough. At the time, I wasn't sure which > tree it was going to go through and it took some time before Thomas > responded, so I was intending to push it through separately. I should > have retracted the tree right after it was determined to be > reimplemented but forgot. That's my mistake not Stephen's. Sorry > about that. Oooh, apparently I knew it was gonna go through genirq but expected it to go through as-is and wanted to accelerate testing. FWIW, I'm sure everyone involved was notified of the move at the time. At any rate, won't happen again. Thanks. -- tejun