Re: [GIT PULL] Early boot SLAB for 2.6.31

[Pekka Enberg <penberg@cs.helsinki.fi>]

Hi Ingo,

Ingo Molnar wrote:
>>>> 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.
>>> The conflicting bits are the patches that remove bootmem 
>>> allocator uses in arch/x86 and kernel/sched.c.
>> Give me an hour and i'll get some minimal testing done.
> 
> This tree doesnt conflict (not even with kmecheck) - and the older 
> bits you sent against the scheduler and against x86 doesnt apply 
> anymore - but they do look scary.

Btw, yeah, it doesn't conflict because I dropped the problematic patches 
and did the bootmem fallback instead.

But now you know why I tried to push all this to -tip. Your tree is 
moving so fast that it's difficult to generate patches that apply to 
both, -tip and mainline, in this particular area :-).

			Pekka