[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20140307130846.ad8ee2b20c6f2dcf6d0b6a33@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2014 13:08:46 -0800
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the akpm tree
On Fri, 7 Mar 2014 11:05:49 -0600 (CST) Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 6 Mar 2014, Andrew Morton wrote:
>
> > > So, by "the whole series" do you mean just/all these:
> > >
> > > percpu-add-raw_cpu_ops.patch
> > > ...
> > > sh-replace-__get_cpu_var-uses.patch
> >
> > Yep. Commented out in http://ozlabs.org/~akpm/mmots/series
> >
> > > If so, I will remove them from my tree today (if you don't get around to
> > > a new mmotm before then).
> >
> > Cool.
>
> I need at least the initial 5 patches that establish the framework in
> -next and do the debugging in order to make further progress on this one.
I'll re-enable
percpu-add-raw_cpu_ops.patch
mm-use-raw_cpu-ops-for-determining-current-numa-node.patch
modules-use-raw_cpu_write-for-initialization-of-per-cpu-refcount.patch
net-replace-__this_cpu_inc-in-routec-with-raw_cpu_inc.patch
percpu-add-preemption-checks-to-__this_cpu-ops.patch
OK?
> The rest are bits and pieces that may require some detail work.
It looks like they will need quite a lot of work I'm afraid. The
automated sweep wasn't very successful but it did demonstrate that
there are nasties and gremlins all over the place.
--
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