From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrew Morton Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for Nov 14 Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 21:53:45 -0800 Message-ID: <20121113215345.680e1f8e.akpm@linux-foundation.org> References: <20121114163042.64f0c0495663331b9c2d60d6@canb.auug.org.au> <20121113213742.292f3ace.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20121113213742.292f3ace.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Stephen Rothwell , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Linus , Ingo Molnar , Hugh Dickins List-Id: linux-next.vger.kernel.org On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 21:37:42 -0800 Andrew Morton wrote: > It would help if the old sched/numa code wasn't in -next while you're > away. Now I think about it, that's going to be hard. If I integrate against tomorrow's -next, the mmotm patches will be against next+schednuma. Then you'll need to unintegrate them - effectively redo them against mainline. That won't be toooo hard, but there are some tricky bits. Is there a way I can extract a schednuma-free -next tomorrow? That way I can do the wrangling. This thing really has been a pain ;( I've been uncharacteristically patient!