From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Rothwell Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the sched tree Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2008 11:55:53 +1000 Message-ID: <20080625115553.adf91947.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="PGP-SHA1"; boundary="Signature=_Wed__25_Jun_2008_11_55_53_+1000_K/6otyGj87rfVL18" Return-path: Received: from chilli.pcug.org.au ([203.10.76.44]:41818 "EHLO smtps.tip.net.au" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750887AbYFYB4O (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Jun 2008 21:56:14 -0400 Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , "H. Peter Anvin" Cc: linux-next@vger.kernel.org --Signature=_Wed__25_Jun_2008_11_55_53_+1000_K/6otyGj87rfVL18 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the sched tree got a trivial conflict in kernel/sched_rt.c between commit 363ab6f1424cdea63e5d182312d60e19077b892a ("core: use performance variant for_each_cpu_mask_nr") from the cpus4096 tree and commit eff6549b957d15d1ad168d90b8c1eb643b9c163f ("sched: rt: move some code around") from the sched tree. The latter just moved some code that the former modified. I took the latter but added the former's modification (for_each_cpu_mask -> for_each_cpu_mask_nr). --=20 Cheers, Stephen Rothwell sfr@canb.auug.org.au http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/ --Signature=_Wed__25_Jun_2008_11_55_53_+1000_K/6otyGj87rfVL18 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkhhpakACgkQTgG2atn1QN800QCgl0HbcqLro6ADeijyVzLpS1M5 m00An2F90Ksh/CbHm/k8oI9HwgK8D2gm =6iLG -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Signature=_Wed__25_Jun_2008_11_55_53_+1000_K/6otyGj87rfVL18--