Re: [PULL] cpumask tree

Rusty Russell
2009-01-03T00:23:40Z

On Saturday 03 January 2009 06:36:33 Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> On Thu, 1 Jan 2009, Rusty Russell wrote:
> >
> > OK, this is the bulk of the conversion to the new cpumask operators.
> > The x86-specific parts (the most aggressive large-NR_CPUS arch) are going
> > via Ingo's tree.
>
> This gets lots of conflicts for me. Some of them look simple enough, but
> not all. io_apic.c gets lots of nasty conflicts, and it _looks_ like I
> should just pick the version of the file that I already have (because the
> only thing that comes in from that is yet another merge commit), but
> kernel/sched.c also gets conflicts in areas with FIXME's etc.
>
> Rusty, Ingo, can you work this out? I pushed out my current tree.

Yes, some went via Ingo's tree and there are some known overlaps.

I'll clean it up and resend pull req this weekend.

Thanks,
Rusty.