lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Dec]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: linux-next: manual merge of the tip tree with the cputime tree

* Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com> wrote:

> On Mon, 19 Dec 2011 09:08:13 +0100
> Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:
>
> >
> > * Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > Today's linux-next merge of the tip tree got a conflict in
> > > fs/proc/uptime.c between commit c3e0ef9a298e ("[S390] fix cputime
> > > overflow in uptime_proc_show") from the cputime tree and commit
> > > 3292beb340c7 ("sched/accounting: Change cpustat fields to an array") from
> > > the tip tree.
> > >
> > > I fixed it up (I think - see below) and can carry the fix as necessary.
> > >
> > > Generally, you guys seem to be working a little at cross purposes ...
> >
> > Agreed.
> >
> > Martin, could you please send Peter and me a pull request of the
> > current cputime bits merged on top of tip:sched/core? Those bits
> > should go upstream via the scheduler tree.
> >
>
> All of it including "[S390] cputime: add sparse checking and
> cleanup" or just the fix for uptime ?

I suspect we can take it all if it's all scheduling/time
related, and add new patches to sched/core to keep it all
concentrated in a single tree?

Thanks,

Ingo


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-12-19 11:39    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans