Re: linux-next: Tree for Feb 10 (acrn)

2021-02-10 Thread Randy Dunlap
On 2/10/21 7:29 PM, Liu, Shuo A wrote: > > > On 2/11/2021 01:52, Randy Dunlap wrote: >> On 2/10/21 3:42 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> Changes since 20210209: >>> >> >> ../drivers/virt/acrn/hsm.c: In function ‘remove_cpu_store’: >> ../drivers/virt/acrn/hsm.c:389:3: error: implici

Re: linux-next: Tree for Feb 10 (acrn)

2021-02-10 Thread Liu, Shuo A
On 2/11/2021 01:52, Randy Dunlap wrote: > On 2/10/21 3:42 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> Changes since 20210209: >> > > ../drivers/virt/acrn/hsm.c: In function ‘remove_cpu_store’: > ../drivers/virt/acrn/hsm.c:389:3: error: implicit declaration of function > ‘remove_cpu’; did you

Re: linux-next: Tree for Feb 10 (acrn)

2021-02-10 Thread Randy Dunlap
On 2/10/21 3:42 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > > Changes since 20210209: > ../drivers/virt/acrn/hsm.c: In function ‘remove_cpu_store’: ../drivers/virt/acrn/hsm.c:389:3: error: implicit declaration of function ‘remove_cpu’; did you mean ‘register_cpu’? [-Werror=implicit-function-declar

linux-next: Tree for Feb 10

2021-02-10 Thread Stephen Rothwell
Hi all, Changes since 20210209: The powerpc tree still had its build failure in the allyesconfig for which I applied a supplied patch. The v4l-dvb tree gained a build failure so I used the version from next-20210209. The rdma tree gained a conflict against Linus' tree. The drm-misc tree gained

linux-next: Tree for Feb 10

2017-02-09 Thread Stephen Rothwell
Hi all, Changes since 20170209: The l2mtd-tree still had ist build failure so I used the version from next-20170208. The kvm tree gained conflicts against the powerpc tree. The akpm-current tree gained conflicts against the xfs tree. The akpm tree gained a conflict against the net tree. Non-m

linux-next: Tree for Feb 10

2016-02-09 Thread Stephen Rothwell
Hi all, Changes since 20160209: The xfs tree lost its build failure. The drm-misc tree gained a build failure so I used the version from next-20160209. The aio tree still had a build failure so I used the version from next-20160111. The akpm-current tree gained a conflict against the xfs tree

linux-next: Tree for Feb 10

2015-02-10 Thread Stephen Rothwell
Hi all, Please oo not add any material destined for v3.21 to your linux-next included trees until after v3.20-rc1 has been released. Changes since 20150209: The nfsd tree gained a conflict against the nfs tree. The net-next tree lost its build failure. The sound-asoc tree lost its build failur

Re: [alsa-devel] linux-next: Tree for Feb 10 (snd_hda)

2014-02-12 Thread Takashi Iwai
At Mon, 10 Feb 2014 10:15:47 -0800, Randy Dunlap wrote: > > On 02/09/2014 09:17 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > This tree fails (more than usual) the powerpc allyesconfig build. > > > > Changes since 20140207: > > > > on x86_64: > > sound/built-in.o: In function `snd_hda_codec

linux-next: Tree for Feb 10

2014-02-09 Thread Stephen Rothwell
Hi all, This tree fails (more than usual) the powerpc allyesconfig build. Changes since 20140207: The powerpc tree still had its build failure. The drm-intel tree gained a conflict against the drm-intel-fixes tree. The staging tree gained a build failure for which I disabled a driver. The akp