Re: linux-next: manual merge of the tip tree with the cputime tree

From: Martin Schwidefsky
Date: Mon Dec 19 2011 - 09:24:17 EST


On Mon, 19 Dec 2011 12:25:47 +0100
Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx> wrote:

>
> * Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > > 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?
>
> Btw., i'd suggest to keep your commits as-is and merge
> tip:sched/core into your tree - and send the result to me so
> that we can make that the new sched/core.
>
> That way your commits are preserved and the conflicts are
> resolved.

Just did that and pushed out the result on

git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/s390/linux.git cputime-tip

Pulling either the original tip sched/core branch or the cputime-tip branch
to an up-to-date repository fails by the way, it gives a conflict in
kernel/sched/fair.c.
And then there is the thing with cpustat being u64. It really should be
cputime64_t. How do you want that resolved, I assume an additional patch
on top?

--
blue skies,
Martin.

"Reality continues to ruin my life." - Calvin.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/