From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1760953Ab2C3OZ4 (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Fri, 30 Mar 2012 10:25:56 -0400
Received: from mail-wg0-f44.google.com ([74.125.82.44]:55751 "EHLO
	mail-wg0-f44.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1760779Ab2C3OZt (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Fri, 30 Mar 2012 10:25:49 -0400
Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2012 16:25:44 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Russell King <rmk@arm.linux.org.uk>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
        "linux-next@vger.kernel.org" <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL/NEXT] sched/arch: Introduce the
 finish_arch_post_lock_switch() scheduler callback
Message-ID: <20120330142544.GA13966@gmail.com>
References: <20120313095020.GA13220@flint.arm.linux.org.uk>
 <20120313101859.GA2626@elte.hu>
 <20120313112729.GA25835@flint.arm.linux.org.uk>
 <20120313115640.GA27378@elte.hu>
 <20120313121707.GA2174@flint.arm.linux.org.uk>
 <20120313124433.GA15333@elte.hu>
 <20120313130427.GC2174@flint.arm.linux.org.uk>
 <20120313133115.GA21634@elte.hu>
 <20120313154716.GA31293@elte.hu>
 <20120330135255.GC23295@arm.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20120330135255.GC23295@arm.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org


* Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com> wrote:

> Hi Ingo,
> 
> On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 03:47:16PM +0000, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > Anyway - regardless of any differences and flames about workflow 
> > details, both you and Catalin should still feel free to use both 
> > the original commit (1cf00341547a) or the tip:sched/arch branch 
> > I provided (01f23e1630d9).
> 
> About the scheduler hook patch, would it go into mainline via 
> the sched/urgent or the sched/arch branch? I would like to 
> rebase the ARM-specific patches on top of one of these 
> branches and send you a pull request (with Russell's ack).

I've merged it into sched/urgent yesterday, which I'll send to 
Linus - so you can base it on that.

Thanks,

	Ingo