[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1262625721.2724.158.camel@mulgrave.site>
Date: Mon, 04 Jan 2010 11:22:00 -0600
From: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...e.de>
To: Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Stefani Seibold <stefani@...bold.net>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-scsi <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] libsrp: fix compile failure
On Mon, 2010-01-04 at 16:21 +0100, Jiri Kosina wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Dec 2009, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> > > The fix is simple, just add the include, but how did this happen? This
> > > change, introduced at -rc2, hardly looks like a bug fix, and it clearly
> > > didn't go through linux-next, which would have picked up this compile
> > > failure (it only occurs on ppc because of the ibm virtual scsi target).
> >
> > It came through Andrew - and apparently parts of Andrews chain weren't in
> > next. Don't know why.
>
> Uhm ... are they supposed to be? -mm is being built on top of -next, not
> vice versa, right?
Well, the fact that the compile failure wasn't detected before it went
upstream should answer that ...
But to be more specific: linux-next is our integration tree (and also
the obscure architecture compile tree). To ensure the best possible
integration, every tree should be built and tested in linux-next at
least once before it goes to Linus. There were originally technical
reasons why -mm wasn't in ... I just thought they'd been fixed by now.
James
--
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