Mike Travis wrote: > Rusty Russell wrote: >> Like cpu_coregroup_map, but returns a (const) pointer. >> >> (This will go to Ingo separately as part of the x86 series, just >> airing it here for thoroughness). >> >> Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> Signed-off-by: Mike Travis <travis@xxxxxxx> >> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx> > > I've pulled this patch into the queue for my cpus4096-for-ingo tree. > > [PATCH 1/4] cpumask: cpu_coregroup_mask(): x86 > > I can also line up a queue for sched related changes: > > [PATCH 4/4] cpumask: Replace cpu_coregroup_map with cpu_coregroup_map() > > Is there any status on the corresponding changes for sparc, s390? (I assume > that they'll need to be merged into linux-next?) > > [PATCH 2/4] cpumask: cpu_coregroup_mask(): sparc > [PATCH 3/4] cpumask: cpu_coregroup_mask(): s390 Oops, never mind. I just noticed that all 4 have already been pushed via linux-next. Ingo - how do we get these back into -tip for testing with other cpus4096 changes? Do I need to do anything? Thanks, Mike -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
