Re: [GIT PULL] Early boot SLAB for 2.6.31

[Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>]

* Pekka Enberg <penberg@cs.helsinki.fi> wrote:

> Linus Torvalds wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 10 Jun 2009, Pekka J Enberg wrote:
>
>>> I already have patches for that but they are against the -tip 
>>> tree so I think we ought to just merge this series to mainline 
>>> and fix everything up in subsystem trees for 2.6.31 proper.
>>
>> Hmm. Are there any reasons why the scheduler fixups can't go in 
>> this series? Do they depend on other things in -tip?
>
> The patches are rebased to -tip, yeah. I can do a version against 
> your tree if you want but that will mean merge conflicts for Ingo. 
> Hmm?

I'm a tiny bit nervous about the tested-ness of the patches. Such 
stuff rarely works at first try. But it's obviously nice changes.

What kind of conflicts are there against -tip? The diffstat suggests 
it's mostly in-SLAB code, right? There shouldnt be much to conflict, 
except kmemcheck - which has more or less trivial callbacks there. 

	Ingo