* Frederic Weisbecker <fweis...@gmail.com> wrote:
> So I propose you something even more simple. The choice of
> tip:timers/core as a base was actually just about topic. But there
> is no dependency on it. (And actually sched/core would have been a
> better choice for a base if any).
>
> So in order to fix the conflict and minimize the dependencies, I
> just rebased the patches on top of tip:core/locking only. No merge
> on top of that. It seems to work pretty well.
>
> The pullable result is in sched/cputime on my tree. Let me know if
> that's ok for you.
Yeah, that sounds excellent. Thomas, you might want to keep this in a
sparate branch from timers/core though. We still have timers/nohz for
example.
Thanks,
Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
