Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 10 Jun 2009 22:43:18 +0200 | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: [GIT PULL] Early boot SLAB for 2.6.31 |
| |
* Pekka Enberg <penberg@cs.helsinki.fi> wrote:
> Linus Torvalds wrote: >> >> On Wed, 10 Jun 2009, Pekka J Enberg wrote: > >>> I already have patches for that but they are against the -tip >>> tree so I think we ought to just merge this series to mainline >>> and fix everything up in subsystem trees for 2.6.31 proper. >> >> Hmm. Are there any reasons why the scheduler fixups can't go in >> this series? Do they depend on other things in -tip? > > The patches are rebased to -tip, yeah. I can do a version against > your tree if you want but that will mean merge conflicts for Ingo. > Hmm?
I'm a tiny bit nervous about the tested-ness of the patches. Such stuff rarely works at first try. But it's obviously nice changes.
What kind of conflicts are there against -tip? The diffstat suggests it's mostly in-SLAB code, right? There shouldnt be much to conflict, except kmemcheck - which has more or less trivial callbacks there.
Ingo
| |