[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100203222616.GF5068@nowhere>
Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2010 23:26:21 +0100
From: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, linux-next@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Xiao Guangrong <xiaoguangrong@...fujitsu.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the percpu tree with the tip tree
On Wed, Feb 03, 2010 at 04:38:22PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the percpu tree got a conflict in
> include/linux/ftrace_event.h, include/trace/ftrace.h,
> kernel/trace/trace_kprobe.c, kernel/trace/trace_syscalls.c and
> kernel/trace/trace_event_profile.c between commit
> 430ad5a600a83956749307b13257c464c3826b55 ("perf: Factorize trace events
> raw sample buffer operations") from the tip tree and commit
> eeb721be6bc03fe37755e69ab5c3ba2fe9897fd9 ("percpu: add __percpu sparse
> annotations to trace") from the percpu tree.
>
> I attempted to fix them up (see below) but someone should check the
> result carefully. (The apparently unchanged files below used the tip
> tree versions.)
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell sfr@...b.auug.org.au
I'm not very used to review patches on patches :)
But yeah that looks good to me.
Thanks!
--
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