Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756645AbYGSVyH (ORCPT ); Sat, 19 Jul 2008 17:54:07 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754950AbYGSVxz (ORCPT ); Sat, 19 Jul 2008 17:53:55 -0400 Received: from mx3.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.1.138]:46110 "EHLO mx3.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754920AbYGSVxz (ORCPT ); Sat, 19 Jul 2008 17:53:55 -0400 Date: Sat, 19 Jul 2008 23:53:25 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: Suresh Siddha Cc: Yinghai Lu , Zachary Amsden , "Maciej W. Rozycki" , "x86@kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Jeremy Fitzhardinge Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: APIC: Remove apic_write_around(); use alternatives Message-ID: <20080719215325.GA12737@elte.hu> References: <20080718210348.GB24373@elte.hu> <86802c440807181413n7e79e821l90afaae86b322de9@mail.gmail.com> <1216420937.30348.30.camel@bodhitayantram.eng.vmware.com> <20080718224922.GB4507@linux-os.sc.intel.com> <86802c440807181551l7e6e143dy7cea8ab59f1830ed@mail.gmail.com> <20080718230012.GD4507@linux-os.sc.intel.com> <86802c440807181604y502e7deal98abfeb1ceee769d@mail.gmail.com> <20080718231828.GE4507@linux-os.sc.intel.com> <20080719214944.GC836@elte.hu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080719214944.GC836@elte.hu> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-ELTE-VirusStatus: clean X-ELTE-SpamScore: -1.5 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-1.5 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.2.3 -1.5 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1605 Lines: 51 * Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > maciej, patch will go first, and x2apic will goes later, so bisect > > > on x2apic will be broken. > > > > hm, ok. Ingo? should I send the rebased 30 or so patches. or we can > > move this patch later. > > hm, yes, please send the rebased patches - as this stuff has some > risks so bisectability is important. hm, actually - the order is correct so no need to rebase any of this. We've got two topics: tip/x86/apic and tip/x86/x2apic. both tip/x86/x2apic and tip/x86/apic were OK standalone. I merged them together in this commit: commit 453c1404c5273a30d715e5a83372a78cff70b6d9 Merge: a208f37... 35b6805... Author: Ingo Molnar Date: Fri Jul 18 23:00:05 2008 +0200 Merge branch 'x86/apic' into x86/x2apic Conflicts: arch/x86/kernel/paravirt.c arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c arch/x86/kernel/vmi_32.c arch/x86/lguest/boot.c arch/x86/xen/enlighten.c include/asm-x86/apic.h include/asm-x86/paravirt.h Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar and that didnt work straight away, so i applied your fixups - but that's the next commit. So there's only a single commit that is not bisectable and that's OK. so unless there's some other breakage i missed, this should be fine and no need to resend/rebase anything. Ingo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/