[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2008 17:33:46 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Mike Travis <travis@....com>
Cc: Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@...il.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
linux-next@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for June 5
* Mike Travis <travis@....com> wrote:
> The patch ordering was incorrect as I removed the node_to_cpumask_map
> before I replaced the MAX_NUMNODES, should have been the opposite.
It needed the combination 4 failures along the line: the debug check was
not complete, the ordering was bad and thus the splitup was bad as well
- and then one component went missing in linux-next and the combined
effect created this bug that needed a bisection by Andrew and Vegard to
figure out.
the moral: we now tightened the debug check, fixed the integration bug
and tightened the checks we have for patch propagation. (Thomas just
added the new tip-check-integration script to tip/tip that implements
this)
Ingo
--
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