[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120313154716.GA31293@elte.hu>
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2012 16:47:16 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Russell King <rmk@....linux.org.uk>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL/NEXT] sched/arch: Introduce the
finish_arch_post_lock_switch() scheduler callback
Anyway - regardless of any differences and flames about workflow
details, both you and Catalin should still feel free to use both
the original commit (1cf00341547a) or the tip:sched/arch branch
I provided (01f23e1630d9).
[ At the end of the merge window I'll try to make sure that at
least one of them got upstream ;-) ]
Thanks,
Ingo
--
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