[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090313032015.GD18760@elte.hu>
Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2009 04:20:15 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
Mike Travis <travis@....com>
Subject: Re: [PULL] x86 cpumask work
* Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au> wrote:
> On Friday 13 March 2009 11:27:43 Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > * Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au> wrote:
> > > Missing a core patch (it even got a compile warning with that
> > > config).
> > So it's manual work and sometimes i notice them amongst a
> > boatload of other warnings, sometimes i dont.
>
> Me too :( I thought you were starting a de-warning tree? I'd
> be happy to send you patches (particularly, exporting
> deprecated symbols should not give a warning!).
Yeah - i have a de-warning tree, but it's not yet fully up and
running for -tip qa automation.
> > > But there's something else wrong. Firing up my 64-bit
> > > test box now.
> >
> > Great - so you can reproduce. Thanks,
>
> Yep, and I'm running some stress tests as well now.
>
> Perhaps throw away that tree, and I'll feed you a new one (the
> core patch needs to go at the front), but I can work either
> way.
Ok, i dropped it back to d95c357.
Suggestion for future workflow: we wouldnt have these somewhat
stressful (and stressful to you mostly!), large hickups and
history-less trees if you sent stuff more gradually and not so
close to the merge window. You exposed some of your changes to
linux-next but that's not nearly enough testing in practice for
x86-affecting patches.
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