From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "H. Peter Anvin" Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen tree with the tip tree Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2011 11:26:37 -0700 Message-ID: <4E5693DD.2010307@zytor.com> References: <20110825142450.c84e02d8763cfd1a93411844@canb.auug.org.au> <4E5690C3.2050706@goop.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <4E5690C3.2050706@goop.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge Cc: Stephen Rothwell , Xen Devel , Peter Zijlstra , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-next@vger.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 08/25/2011 11:13 AM, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: > On 08/24/2011 09:24 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> Today's linux-next merge of the xen tree got a conflict in >> arch/x86/include/asm/spinlock.h between a series of commits from the tip >> tree and a smaller series of similar commits from the xen tree. >> >> I see that Linus is commenting on these patches at the moment, and its >> not easy to resolve the conflicts, so I will just use the xen tree from >> next-20110824 for today. >> > > Thanks Stephen; the xen tree ones are more current, and I want to make > sure I didn't screw up any of the cmpxchg/xadd changes in a wider test env. > Stephen: the x86/spinlocks branch in the -tip tree is obsolete and should be dropped. -hpa