Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-84312-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:4601:e00::3 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:4601:e00::3;
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>, "Paul E. McKenney"
 <paulmck@kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin"
 <hpa@zytor.com>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Linux Next
 Mailing List <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>, x86@kernel.org
Subject: Re: linux-next: duplicate patch in the rcu tree
In-Reply-To: <20240228120610.0fdd20af@canb.auug.org.au>
References: <20240228120610.0fdd20af@canb.auug.org.au>
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2024 02:17:05 +0100
Message-ID: <87jzmp8k1a.ffs@tglx>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain

On Wed, Feb 28 2024 at 12:06, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> The following commit is also in the tip tree as a different commit
> (but the same patch):
>
>   020eee167cca ("x86/nmi: Fix "in NMI handler" check")
>
> This is commit
>
>   d54e56f31a34 ("x86/nmi: Fix the inverse "in NMI handler" check")
>
> in the tip tree.

And why the heck is the RCU tree carrying x86 specific stuff which has
absolutely nothing to do with RCU?

Just because, right?

Thanks,

        tglx