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

From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
	linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the workqueues tree with the tip tree
Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2009 18:48:43 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4B0E4EFB.2070705@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20091126092631.GA17253@elte.hu>

Hello, Ingo.

11/26/2009 06:26 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>> Sure, which sched/* branch should I base these patches on?
> 
> You could send the patch you rely on standalone (it seems to be a single 
> patch) and we can look at applying it to the scheduler tree. That 
> reduces the conflicts on an ongoing basis. Please Cc: PeterZ and Mike 
> Galbraith as well.

The tree contains four scheduler patches.

0001-sched-rename-preempt_notifier-to-sched_notifier-and-.patch
0002-sched-update-sched_notifier-and-add-wakeup-sleep-not.patch
0003-sched-implement-sched_notifier_wake_up_process.patch
0004-sched-implement-force_cpus_allowed.patch

1, 2 and 4 are somewhat spread throughout sched.c so it would be
better if they all are routed through sched tree.  Currently the
wq#for-sched contains the followings on top of linus#master.

* Adds debugobj support to workqueue.

* Pulls in sched/urgent to receive the scheduler fix.

* Adds the above four patches.

If pulling in from the existing branch is an option, I'd prefer that.
If not, please let me know.  I'll send the above four patches against
sched/urgent.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun