[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1179176058.3703.85.camel@mulgrave.il.steeleye.com>
Date: Mon, 14 May 2007 15:54:18 -0500
From: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Subject: Re: [VOYAGER] fix build broken by shift to smp_ops
On Mon, 2007-05-14 at 13:37 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Mon, 14 May 2007 13:02:42 -0700
> Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org> wrote:
>
> > Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > Does "that" have name? I can find no patch in -mm which appears to have
> > > anything to do with SMP consolidation, and this patch applies cleanly to
> > > the current -mm lineup.
> > >
> > Sorry, I thought you'd picked this up:
> >
> >
> > Subject: i386: move common parts of smp into their own file
> >
> > Several parts of kernel/smp.c and smpboot.c are generally useful for
> > other subarchitectures and paravirt_ops implementations, so make them
> > available for reuse.
>
> Confused. This patch conflicts a lot with James's one (which I named
> voyager-fix-build-broken-by-shift-to-smp_ops.patch).
> If your "i386: move common parts of smp into their own file" also fixes
> Voyager and is preferred then cool, but a) the changelog should tell us
> that and b) could James please test it?
OK, let me try a brief history. A while ago Eric pointed out that the
smp ops patch in -mm would break voyager. So we worked on (and tested a
fix for it). Part of the fix was the prerequisite patch "i386: move
common parts of smp into their own file". The fix on top of this was
called "i386: fix voyager build" which actually fixed the voyager build.
I've been nagging Andi for a couple of weeks now to get these two
upstream. Finally he replied that the he wasn't planning on sending the
precursor "i386: move common parts of smp into their own file" upstream
for 2.6.22. So I had to do a patch that would fix the voyager build
without this ... which is what you have.
So, you either need the single patch you have, or the other two entitled
"i386: move common parts of smp into their own file".
"i386: fix voyager build"
James
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists