[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090612140730.GJ32105@elte.hu>
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2009 16:07:30 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
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
* Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org> wrote:
> On Fri, 2009-06-12 at 15:44 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> > This is certainly doable for agreeable features - which is the bulk
> > - and it is being done.
> >
> > But this is a catch-22 for _controversial_ new features - which
> > perfcounters clearly was, in case you turned off your lkml
> > subscription ;-)
>
> I didn't :-) My point here is that Linus can make a decision with
> an email -before- merging so that -next gets a chance, at least
> for a couple of days, to do the integration testing once the
> controversy has been sorted by his highness.
Uhm, the bug you are making a big deal of would have been found and
fixed by Paulus a few hours after any such mail - and probably by me
too as i do daily cross builds to Power.
So yes, we had a bug, but any extra linux-next hoops would not have
prevented it: i could still have messed up by getting lured by that
nice piece of Power7 hardware enablement patch on the last day ;-)
So the bug was my fault for being too fast-and-loose with that
particular patch, creating a ~5-commits-hop build breakage bisection
window on Power.
Now that i'm sufficiently chastised, can we now move on please? :)
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