[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.20.1706220825200.29475@knanqh.ubzr>
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2017 08:33:31 -0400 (EDT)
From: Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@...aro.org>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] some scheduler code movements
On Thu, 22 Jun 2017, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@...aro.org> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 21 Jun 2017, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > > I've applied the first patch to the scheduler tree yesterday, but the other
> > > changes unfortunately conflicted with other pending scheduler work - could
> > > you please re-post the other 3 patches on top of tip:sched/core?
> >
> > Sure, here they are.
>
> Hm, what tree is this against? First patch won't apply to the latest
> tip:sched/core:
>
> patching file kernel/sched/core.c
> Hunk #7 succeeded at 5253 (offset -2 lines).
> Hunk #8 FAILED at 5285.
> Hunk #9 succeeded at 5581 (offset 1 line).
> Hunk #10 succeeded at 6485 (offset 1 line).
> 1 out of 10 hunks FAILED -- rejects in file kernel/sched/core.c
That's against my copy of tip/sched/core as of yesterday:
commit f11cc0760b8397e0d230122606421b6a96e9f869
Author: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>
AuthorDate: Wed Jun 14 19:37:30 2017 -0700
Commit: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
CommitDate: Tue Jun 20 12:48:37 2017 +0200
sched/core: Drop the unused try_get_task_struct() helper function
on which I pre-applied my previous patch #1/4 ("cpuset/sched: cpuset
makes sense for SMP only") you said having already applied on your side
but that didn't show up in the publicly visible sched/core yet.
Nicolas
Powered by blists - more mailing lists