Re: rcu-walk and dcache scaling tree update and status

Stephen Rothwell
2010-12-13T23:21:45Z

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1605 bytes --]

Hi Sedat,

On Mon, 13 Dec 2010 17:48:18 +0100 Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
> I will give this new refreshed patchset a try (testing against
> systemd-v15, vfat problem I reported) with none-BKL-config of course.
>
> If linux-next will be the new base, then please rebase on it (see below).
> (Last time I solved the CONFLICTs manually).

Nothing released publicly should ever be based on linux-next (unless it
is a short term testing only tree like -mm) as it is rebuilt every day.
Thing should really only be based on other publicly released stable trees.

This is especially true of trees that will be included in linux-next
itself.

> $ git pull git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/npiggin/linux-npiggin.git
> vfs-scale-working:vfs-scale-working
> remote: Counting objects: 1196, done.
> remote: Compressing objects: 100% (80/80), done.
> remote: Total 931 (delta 866), reused 915 (delta 851)
> Receiving objects: 100% (931/931), 207.90 KiB | 376 KiB/s, done.
> Resolving deltas: 100% (866/866), completed with 258 local objects.
> From git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/npiggin/linux-npiggin
> * [new branch] vfs-scale-working -> vfs-scale-working
> CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in fs/fuse/inode.c
> CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in fs/super.c

Thanks for the heads up, though. When I include Nick's tree in
linux-next, I will do these merge fixes if necessary (as will Linus when
it gets to him).

--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 490 bytes --]