Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen tree with the tip tree

[Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>]

On Tue, 13 Sep 2011, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:

> On 09/13/2011 08:07 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Tue, 13 Sep 2011, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> On Fri, 26 Aug 2011 12:54:41 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> >>> On Thu, 25 Aug 2011 16:12:33 -0700 "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com> wrote:
> >>>> On 08/25/2011 04:06 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> >>>>>> Stephen: the x86/spinlocks branch in the -tip tree is obsolete and
> >>>>>> should be dropped.
> >>>>> That's a bit tricky as I get a rolled up tip tree.  The best I could do
> >>>>> is revert the commit that merges the x86/spinlocks branch into
> >>>>> auto-latest ...  I'll do that for today (unless something happens to the
> >>>>> tip tree in the next hour).
> >>>>>
> >>>> OK, let me bother Ingo about it.
> >>> For today, I have done "git revert -m 1 6f8fa39c81f1" after merging the
> >>> tip tree.
> >> I am still doing this in each linux-next, and it doesn't appear to have
> >> been fixed up the the tree on tesla.tglx.de, yet, I think.
> > We'll take it out. 
> 
> Actually, the tip x86/spinlocks was the most up-to-date version of those
> patches (since hpa had rebased them to a more recent version of mainline).

Mooo. You tell that after we did a nasty rebase from hell :(
 
Thanks,

	tglx