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    [W:0.029 / U:29.764 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site