On 2011-02-01 14:04, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > On 02/01/2011 02:01 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote: >> Looks good to me. I guess this applies without the first patch? Then it >> should go in (unless you are working on a new version for 1/3). > > It's wrong without the first patch (micro instead of nanoseconds). > However, I read Anthony's message as a suggestion rather than a rejection. >
Yes, it's probably a better idea anyway to do this stepwise. Jan -- Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT T DE IT 1 Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux
