[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1346865065.2600.34.camel@twins>
Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2012 19:11:05 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the rcu tree with the tip tree
On Wed, 2012-09-05 at 09:39 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 05, 2012 at 01:59:47PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi Paul,
> >
> > Today's linux-next merge of the rcu tree got a conflict in
> > kernel/sched/core.c between commit f319da0c6894 ("sched: Fix load avg vs
> > cpu-hotplug") from the tip tree and commit ead504e5600e ("sched: Fix load
> > avg vs cpu-hotplug") from the rcu tree.
> >
> > These are 2 slightly different versions of the same patch :-( Same author
> > time, different commit times ... The rcu tree version contains this
> > extra bit in the commit message:
> >
> > " [ paulmck: Move call to calc_load_migration to CPU_DEAD to avoid
> > miscounting noted by Rakib. ]"
> >
> > So I used it. Let me know if this is not correct.
>
> My guess is that Peter Zijlstra will replace my version at some point,
> at which point I will drop mine. But from what I can see, the version
> currently in -tip is the older version, so I will keep mine until
> -tip updates.
Yeah, that was a fail on my part. I'll go sort it after dinner.
--
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