Re: linux-next: manual merge of the percpu tree with the tip tree

2014-10-09 Thread Frederic Weisbecker
On Thu, Oct 09, 2014 at 09:15:12AM -0400, Tejun Heo wrote: > On Thu, Oct 09, 2014 at 03:13:31PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 09, 2014 at 03:50:18PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > > > Today's linux-next merge of the percpu tree got a conflict in > > >

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the percpu tree with the tip tree

2014-10-09 Thread Tejun Heo
On Thu, Oct 09, 2014 at 03:13:31PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote: > On Thu, Oct 09, 2014 at 03:50:18PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > Today's linux-next merge of the percpu tree got a conflict in > > kernel/irq_work.c between commit 76a33061b932 ("irq_work: Force raised > >

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the percpu tree with the tip tree

2014-10-09 Thread Frederic Weisbecker
On Thu, Oct 09, 2014 at 03:50:18PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > > Today's linux-next merge of the percpu tree got a conflict in > kernel/irq_work.c between commit 76a33061b932 ("irq_work: Force raised > irq work to run on irq work interrupt") from the tip tree and commit >

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the percpu tree with the tip tree

2014-10-09 Thread Frederic Weisbecker
On Thu, Oct 09, 2014 at 03:50:18PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the percpu tree got a conflict in kernel/irq_work.c between commit 76a33061b932 (irq_work: Force raised irq work to run on irq work interrupt) from the tip tree and commit 22127e93c587

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the percpu tree with the tip tree

2014-10-09 Thread Tejun Heo
On Thu, Oct 09, 2014 at 03:13:31PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote: On Thu, Oct 09, 2014 at 03:50:18PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the percpu tree got a conflict in kernel/irq_work.c between commit 76a33061b932 (irq_work: Force raised irq work to

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the percpu tree with the tip tree

2014-10-09 Thread Frederic Weisbecker
On Thu, Oct 09, 2014 at 09:15:12AM -0400, Tejun Heo wrote: On Thu, Oct 09, 2014 at 03:13:31PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote: On Thu, Oct 09, 2014 at 03:50:18PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the percpu tree got a conflict in kernel/irq_work.c

linux-next: manual merge of the percpu tree with the tip tree

2014-10-08 Thread Stephen Rothwell
Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the percpu tree got a conflict in kernel/irq_work.c between commit 76a33061b932 ("irq_work: Force raised irq work to run on irq work interrupt") from the tip tree and commit 22127e93c587 ("time: Replace __get_cpu_var uses") from the percpu tree. I fixed it up

linux-next: manual merge of the percpu tree with the tip tree

2014-10-08 Thread Stephen Rothwell
Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the percpu tree got a conflict in kernel/irq_work.c between commit 76a33061b932 (irq_work: Force raised irq work to run on irq work interrupt) from the tip tree and commit 22127e93c587 (time: Replace __get_cpu_var uses) from the percpu tree. I fixed it up (see