[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4949851E.5000304@sgi.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2008 15:02:54 -0800
From: Mike Travis <travis@....com>
To: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
CC: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-next@...r.kernel.org,
Jack Steiner <steiner@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] cpumask: cpu_coregroup_mask(): x86
Mike Travis wrote:
> Rusty Russell wrote:
>> Like cpu_coregroup_map, but returns a (const) pointer.
>>
>> (This will go to Ingo separately as part of the x86 series, just
>> airing it here for thoroughness).
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
>> Signed-off-by: Mike Travis <travis@....com>
>> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>
>
> I've pulled this patch into the queue for my cpus4096-for-ingo tree.
>
> [PATCH 1/4] cpumask: cpu_coregroup_mask(): x86
>
> I can also line up a queue for sched related changes:
>
> [PATCH 4/4] cpumask: Replace cpu_coregroup_map with cpu_coregroup_map()
>
> Is there any status on the corresponding changes for sparc, s390? (I assume
> that they'll need to be merged into linux-next?)
>
> [PATCH 2/4] cpumask: cpu_coregroup_mask(): sparc
> [PATCH 3/4] cpumask: cpu_coregroup_mask(): s390
Oops, never mind. I just noticed that all 4 have already been pushed via
linux-next.
Ingo - how do we get these back into -tip for testing with other cpus4096
changes? Do I need to do anything?
Thanks,
Mike
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists