[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <201102241129.53232.rjw@sisk.pl>
Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2011 11:29:52 +0100
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the tip tree with the acpi tree
On Thursday, February 24, 2011, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the tip tree got a conflict in
> arch/x86/kernel/acpi/sleep.c between commit
> a69fa313606a51cee99d802c14895330948f60c8 ("ACPI / PM: Drop
> acpi_restore_state_mem()") from the acpi tree and commit
> d1ee433539ea5963a8f946f3428b335d1c5fdb20 ("x86, trampoline: Use the
> unified trampoline setup for ACPI wakeup") from the tip tree.
>
> Just context (I think).
Yes. The ACPI tree renames a function that the x86 tree modifies.
> I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary.
Please do, 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