From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261212AbVFBRey (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Jun 2005 13:34:54 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261210AbVFBRey (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Jun 2005 13:34:54 -0400 Received: from e34.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.132]:29319 "EHLO e34.co.us.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261208AbVFBReu (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Jun 2005 13:34:50 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] new timeofday x86-64 arch specific changes (v. B1) From: john stultz To: Parag Warudkar Cc: Andi Kleen , lkml , Tim Schmielau , George Anzinger , albert@users.sourceforge.net, Ulrich Windl , Christoph Lameter , Dominik Brodowski , David Mosberger , Andrew Morton , paulus@samba.org, schwidefsky@de.ibm.com, keith maanthey , Chris McDermott , Max Asbock , mahuja@us.ibm.com, Nishanth Aravamudan , Darren Hart , "Darrick J. Wong" , Anton Blanchard , donf@us.ibm.com, mpm@selenic.com, benh@kernel.crashing.org In-Reply-To: <200506012037.53226.kernel-stuff@comcast.net> References: <1117667378.6801.80.camel@cog.beaverton.ibm.com> <1117667536.17474.0.camel@cog.beaverton.ibm.com> <1117667631.17474.3.camel@cog.beaverton.ibm.com> <200506012037.53226.kernel-stuff@comcast.net> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Thu, 02 Jun 2005 10:34:39 -0700 Message-Id: <1117733679.17804.7.camel@cog.beaverton.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.0.4 (2.0.4-4) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2005-06-01 at 20:37 -0400, Parag Warudkar wrote: > On Wednesday 01 June 2005 19:13, john stultz wrote: > > This patch converts the x86-64 arch to use the new timeofday > > infrastructure. It applies on top of my timeofday-core_B1 patch. > > This one fails to apply - time.c HUNK #1 gets rejected. (Attached) Yea, sorry. My naming scheme isn't quite granular enough. The patch is against Linus' git tree as of yesterday, not -rc5 vanilla. If you grab Linus' current tree it should apply. Sorry about the confusion. -john