From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754027AbZHCCQK (ORCPT ); Sun, 2 Aug 2009 22:16:10 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752289AbZHCCQJ (ORCPT ); Sun, 2 Aug 2009 22:16:09 -0400 Received: from smtp1.linux-foundation.org ([140.211.169.13]:58703 "EHLO smtp1.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753099AbZHCCQJ (ORCPT ); Sun, 2 Aug 2009 22:16:09 -0400 Date: Sun, 2 Aug 2009 19:14:11 -0700 (PDT) From: Linus Torvalds X-X-Sender: torvalds@localhost.localdomain To: Tejun Heo cc: Ingo Molnar , "H. Peter Anvin" , Thomas Gleixner , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Additional x86 fixes for 2.6.31-rc5 In-Reply-To: <4A76421E.3040005@kernel.org> Message-ID: References: <200907311813.n6VIDe9S023442@voreg.hos.anvin.org> <20090731195705.GA12270@elte.hu> <4A76421E.3040005@kernel.org> User-Agent: Alpine 2.01 (LFD 1184 2008-12-16) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 3 Aug 2009, Tejun Heo wrote: > > Do you want to queue it for 2.6.31? Yeah, no. > Given that the generated code > changes compared to the previous kernels (both pre and post percpu > stuff), I think it would be safer to queue it for 2.6.32 window. I > would be happy to carry it in the percpu tree. Please do. I don't want it for 31, and I do want it to get more testing. I ran with it for a few days, and saw no problems, and it looked obvious enough, but there just isn't any overriding reason for it to be in 31. Linus