From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Paul E. McKenney" Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the rcu tree Date: Sun, 9 Feb 2014 21:24:43 -0800 Message-ID: <20140210052443.GH4250@linux.vnet.ibm.com> References: <20140210150047.65f06219ffa970ad34d27d7f@canb.auug.org.au> Reply-To: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from e37.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.158]:37789 "EHLO e37.co.us.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750746AbaBJFYw (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Feb 2014 00:24:52 -0500 Received: from /spool/local by e37.co.us.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Sun, 9 Feb 2014 22:24:51 -0700 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20140210150047.65f06219ffa970ad34d27d7f@canb.auug.org.au> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Stephen Rothwell Cc: Andrew Morton , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, David Rientjes On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 03:00:47PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi Andrew, > > Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in > mm/slub.c between commit f4e40a71719d ("slub: Fix add_full() lockdep > checks") from the rcu tree and commit aee03fe7a7c8 ("mm/slub.c: list_lock > may not be held in some circumstances") from the akpm-current tree. > > These patches try to achieve the same thing, so I arbitrarily chose the > version from the akpm-current tree. My bad -- I forgot to remove my version. Thanx, Paul