[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <51138CFC.9000508@imgtec.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2013 11:16:12 +0000
From: James Hogan <james.hogan@...tec.com>
To: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
CC: linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-next <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Subject: linux-next build conflict between modules and metag trees (LOCKDEP_NOW_UNRELIABLE)
Hi Rusty,
The metag architecture tree adds an add_taint(TAINT_DIE) like other
architectures do, and the modules-next tree adds the
LOCKDEP_NOW_UNRELIABLE flag to all uses of add_taint (but obviously
misses arch/metag since it doesn't exist yet), causing a compile error
on metag in -next when the two are merged together.
Is it okay for me to merge your commit 373d4d0 ("taint: add explicit
flag to show whether lock dep is still OK.") in modules-next into the
base of the metag tree and expect it not to be rebased, so that I can
then squash the fix into the metag tree?
The only commits this would include are:
$ git log --oneline linus/master..373d4d0
373d4d0 taint: add explicit flag to show whether lock dep is still OK.
64748a2 module: printk message when module signature fail taints kernel.
Thanks
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