* Jan Beulich <JBeulich@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>> Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx> 25.08.09 15:56 >>> > >* Jan Beulich <JBeulich@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> Sorry for having forgotten to do so before submitting the first > >> time (I know I had intended to). > > > >This happens. I'm still unsure whether we can do it in .31.0 or need > >to delay it to .31.1 via a -stable backport tag. One more problem > >with it and i think we'll need to delay it - it's just too large and > >changes too many aspects of the linker script. > > > >Would it be possible to split it into two pieces: 'minimal fix' and > >'clean up' portions? > > Besides being cumbersome, that would make it even larger, so I'd > say that's not worth it. I mean the two patches yield the same end result. The first one (which is smaller, hopefully) gets committed to x86/urgent, the second one (the cleanups and other non-essentials) gets pushed upstream in .32. Ingo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-tip-commits" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
|