[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1244815574.7172.171.camel@pasglop>
Date: Sat, 13 Jun 2009 00:06:14 +1000
From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
Linus <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-next@...r.kernel.org,
paulus@...ba.org, ppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: origin tree build failure
On Fri, 2009-06-12 at 15:49 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 2009-06-12 at 23:10 +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> > > On Fri, 2009-06-12 at 14:53 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > > To some extent, here, the issue is on Linus side and it's up to him (Hey
> > > Linus ! still listening ?) to maybe be more proactive at giving an ack
> > > or nack so that we can get a chance to do that final pass of ironing out
> > > the mechanical bugs before we hit the main tree.
> >
> > Let me add a little bit more background to my reasoning here and why I
> > think having this integration testing step is so valuable...
> >
> > It all boils down to bisection and having a bisectable tree.
>
> I think you are way too concentrated on this particular incident,
> and you are generalizing it into something that is not so in
> practice.
Maybe. But maybe it's representative... so far in this merge window,
100% of the powerpc build and runtime breakage upstream comes from stuff
that didn't get into -next before.
Some of the runtime breakage in powerpc-next comes from my own bugs,
indeed, and fortunately I caught it before I asked Linus to pull.
Cheers,
Ben.
--
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