Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the rr tree

From: Ingo Molnar <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2008 09:47:33 +0200

* Stephen Rothwell <[email-masked]> wrote:

> Hi Rusty,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the rr tree got a conflict in 
> kernel/stop_machine.c between commit 
> 961ccddd59d627b89bd3dc284b6517833bbdf25d ("sched: add new API 
> sched_setscheduler_nocheck: add a flag to control access") from the 
> sched tree (which is also in the rr tree) and commit 
> 179da75b083a098ba6192c0900611a92091abfc9 ("stop_machine:simplify") 
> from the rr tree.
> 
> I just took the rr tree version since the former is in both trees.

Rusty, there's a new -tip toy/feature i've applied when creating that 
commit 2 days ago, to eliminate this (predictable) conflict.

Since this is a scheduler infrastructure change, i've put this change 
into a separate topic branch in -tip:

   tip/sched/new-API-sched_setscheduler

This new topic branch is based off upstream -git so you can pick up that 
change alone via a single git-pull, without picking up any other 
scheduler changes. (any further enhancements to that change should be 
done in that topic branches as well)

This topic is integrated into tip/auto-sched-next, so any changes to the 
topic will be propagated into linux-next as well. I think this is the 
right model for doing infrastructure changes - separating them into 
standalone trees so that other subsystem maintainers can pull them when 
they run into conflicts.

Please use that commit and remove 179da75b083a09 so that there's no 
overlap in the sha1 space and no conflicts. -tip can be picked up via: 
http://people.redhat.com/mingo/tip.git/README .

Thanks,

	Ingo