[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170205101729.3a807670@canb.auug.org.au>
Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2017 10:17:29 +1100
From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...nel.org>
Cc: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@...el.com>,
Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Subject: Re: Regression on next-20170203 spi/for-next 3f87493930a0f qemu on
x86_64
Hi Luis,
On Sat, 4 Feb 2017 12:05:42 -0800 "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> though so it seems something with my configuration and boot. I
> bisected next-20170203 between its latest commit and v4.10-rc6 and
> ended up with this bad commit:
>
> 104a519fe1732b4e503ebc7b4ac71b6f0b8a0b62
>
> $ git show 104a519fe1732b4e503ebc7b4ac71b6f0b8a0b62
> commit 104a519fe1732b4e503ebc7b4ac71b6f0b8a0b62
> Merge: 7c3b1edeee66 3f87493930a0
> Author: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
> Date: Fri Feb 3 12:30:38 2017 +1100
>
> Merge remote-tracking branch 'spi/for-next'
>
> I have checked Next/SHA1s and it shows:
>
> mcgrof@...gy ~/linux-next (git::original)$ grep spi Next/SHA1s
> spi-nor dc12bcccadafb5441170e6b7c8a438c91d4f385b
> spi 3f87493930a0f934549b04e100ecc2110e4f1efd
> hwspinlock bd5717a4632cdecafe82d03de7dcb3b1876e2828
>
> The commit 3f87493930a0f934549b04e100ecc2110e4f1efd then seems to be
> what I need to test. I have cloned Mark's spi tree and just tried to
> boot the for-next branch (on v4.10-rc1) on
> 3f87493930a0f934549b04e100ecc2110e4f1efd, and it boots successfully.
> This would lead me to believe this issue might be related to the merge
> conflict resolution done by Stephen, but wanted to check and ask.
> Perhaps there might be some specific tests I can run.
OK, it is possible that the merge is actually incorrect. I did *not*
do any manual resolution of that merge and git only reported an
automatic resolution in file drivers/spi/spi-bcm-qspi.c (which looks ok
from a quick glance).
It is always possible that there is some semantic conflict that git
won't see and didn;t also involve a syntactic conflict or a build
failure. e.g. the internal semantics of a function changes on one side
of the merge but a new usage expecting the old semantics is introduced
on the other side.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
Powered by blists - more mailing lists