[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20090613150634.3221d74a.sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Date: Sat, 13 Jun 2009 15:06:34 +1000
From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
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
Hi Ingo,
On Fri, 12 Jun 2009 16:11:18 +0200 Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> wrote:
>
> But that's axiomatic, isnt it? linux-next build-tests PowerPC as the
> first in the row of tests - so no change that was in linux-next can
> ever cause a build failure on PowerPC, right?
Not really. I build a powerpc ppc64_defconfig and an x86_64 allmodconfig
between merging most trees. At the end of the day, I do the following
builds before releasing linux-next:
powerpc allnoconfig
powerpc64 allnoconfig
powerpc ppc44x_defconfig
powerpc allyesconfig
i386 defconfig
sparc64 defconfig
sparc defconfig
Which clearly doesn't cover all possible configs, but is a start and
catches a lot (the powerpc allyesconfig is only 64 bit).
Then after release, linux-next gets built for a lot of architectures and
configs (see http://kisskb.ellerman.id.au/kisskb/branch/9/). A couple of
people also do randconfig builds which find all sorts of things.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell sfr@...b.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/
Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped
Powered by blists - more mailing lists