Hi, On Thu, 25 Aug 2011 11:26:37 -0700 "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 08/25/2011 11:13 AM, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: > > On 08/24/2011 09:24 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > >> > >> Today's linux-next merge of the xen tree got a conflict in > >> arch/x86/include/asm/spinlock.h between a series of commits from the tip > >> tree and a smaller series of similar commits from the xen tree. > >> > >> I see that Linus is commenting on these patches at the moment, and its > >> not easy to resolve the conflicts, so I will just use the xen tree from > >> next-20110824 for today. > >> > > > > Thanks Stephen; the xen tree ones are more current, and I want to make > > sure I didn't screw up any of the cmpxchg/xadd changes in a wider test env. > > > > Stephen: the x86/spinlocks branch in the -tip tree is obsolete and > should be dropped. That's a bit tricky as I get a rolled up tip tree. The best I could do is revert the commit that merges the x86/spinlocks branch into auto-latest ... I'll do that for today (unless something happens to the tip tree in the next hour). -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/
Attachment:
pgplhBSHdBIG6.pgp
Description: PGP signature
