Andrew Morton wrote: > It'd be better to develop and test this work on top of Thomas's stuff, as > that's what 2.6.20 will doubtless look like. That means working against > -mm. Once Thomas's patches are in mainline then the patches will apply to > Andi's tree too and I can send them over to him. > > That way, the patch-applying-order equals mainstream-merging-order equals > chronological-writing-order, which is generally a good thing. > Sounds sane. Are Thomas's patches in -rc5-mm1? If so, we should rebase paravirt-ops, although I don't want to lose any paravirt patches that you've dropped because they were merged to Andi. Don't know if that is the case, but I did see a bunch of "merged into a subsystem tree" drops from -mm related to paravirt. Thanks, Zach
