On 09/23/2010 11:33 AM, Pekka Enberg wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 6:44 AM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Today's linux-next merge of the tip tree got a conflict in
>> include/linux/percpu.h between commit
>> 6fc80ef491b981f59233beaf6aeaccc0c947031d ("percpu: use percpu allocator
>> on UP too") from the slab tree and commit
>> 8b8e2ec1eeca7f6941bc81cefc9663018d6ceb57 ("percpu: Add {get,put}
>> _cpu_ptr") from the tip tree.
>>
>> Just context changes. I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as
>> necessary.
>
> Why are we seeing a merge conflict here? I cherry-picked patches from
> Tejun's for-next branch but didn't modify them.
That's a different one coming from the perf tree. get_cpu_ptr() is
only used by perf at this point so it got routed through there, so the
conflict. Nothing to worry about.
Thanks.
--
tejun
--
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
