[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20121210104626.GB7264@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2012 11:46:26 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
Lee Schermerhorn <lee.schermerhorn@...com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the tip tree
hi Stephen,
* Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the akpm tree got a conflict in mm/mprotect.c
> between commit ("2083d67027ad") from the tip tree and commit "thp:
> change split_huge_page_pmd() interface" from the akpm tree.
>
> I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action
> is required).
I pre-checked linux-next on Friday, and the attached tarball
with updated akpm patches needed conflict resolutions.
0178-mm-mempolicy-remove-duplicate-code.patch can be dropped I
think.
Note that the merges are not tested though, so it's a JFYI.
Assuming the akpm tree still has roughly the same structure as
the last linux-next tree had.
Thanks,
Ingo
Download attachment "tip-merged-for-akpm.tar.gz" of type "application/x-gzip" (10652 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists