* Andy Lutomirski <luto@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 9:34 PM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > * Andy Lutomirski <luto@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > >> Hi Ingo and Thomas- > >> > >> There's a trivial conflict in the pull request I sent last week. > > > > This is your x86 entry code rework pull request, right? The -tip > > tree now has the RCU commit it depends on, so could you please > > rebase it on top of tip:core/rcu so I can pull it? I'll resolve > > any remaining conflicts with the rest of -tip. > > > > Sure, I can do that in the morning. The pull request merges cleanly > with tip:core/rcu, though, so is the rebase needed? Yes, because your changes rely on the RCU change (semantically), so if anyone bisects into your commits it might result in a subtly broken kernel, right? Thanks, Ingo -- 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
