Re: linux-next: Tree for Feb 15 (CXL on i386)

2021-02-15 Thread Randy Dunlap
On 2/15/21 1:34 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > > Changes since 20210212: > CXL on i386 has these issue: ../drivers/cxl/mem.c:335:2: error: implicit declaration of function ‘writeq’; did you mean ‘writel’? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] writeq(cmd_reg, cxlm->mbox_regs + CXL

Re: linux-next: Tree for Feb 15 (certs/blacklist.c)

2021-02-15 Thread Randy Dunlap
On 2/15/21 1:34 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > > Changes since 20210212: > on x86_64: ld: certs/blacklist.o: in function `is_key_on_revocation_list': blacklist.c:(.text+0x20d): undefined reference to `pkcs7_validate_trust' Full randconfig file is attached. -- ~Randy Reported-by: R

linux-next: Tree for Feb 15

2021-02-15 Thread Stephen Rothwell
Hi all, Changes since 20210212: The net-next tree gained conflicts against the net tree. The mtd tree gained a build failure so I used the version from next-20210212. The ftrace tree gained a conflict against Linus' tree. Non-merge commits (relative to Linus' tree): 10363 10514 files changed,

Re: linux-next: Tree for Feb 15 (net/core/lwt_bpf.c)

2019-02-15 Thread Peter Oskolkov
On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 8:48 AM Randy Dunlap wrote: > > On 2/14/19 10:03 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > Changes since 20190214: > > > > on x86_64: > > ld: net/core/lwt_bpf.o: in function `bpf_lwt_xmit_reroute': > lwt_bpf.c:(.text+0x11e): undefined reference to `ip_route_output_flo

Re: linux-next: Tree for Feb 15 (net/core/lwt_bpf.c)

2019-02-15 Thread Peter Oskolkov
On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 8:48 AM Randy Dunlap wrote: > > On 2/14/19 10:03 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > Changes since 20190214: > > > > on x86_64: > > ld: net/core/lwt_bpf.o: in function `bpf_lwt_xmit_reroute': > lwt_bpf.c:(.text+0x11e): undefined reference to `ip_route_output_flo

Re: linux-next: Tree for Feb 15 (net/core/lwt_bpf.c)

2019-02-15 Thread Randy Dunlap
On 2/14/19 10:03 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > > Changes since 20190214: > on x86_64: ld: net/core/lwt_bpf.o: in function `bpf_lwt_xmit_reroute': lwt_bpf.c:(.text+0x11e): undefined reference to `ip_route_output_flow' ld: net/core/lwt_bpf.o: in function `bpf_input': lwt_bpf.c:(.text+0x

linux-next: Tree for Feb 15

2019-02-14 Thread Stephen Rothwell
Hi all, Changes since 20190214: The tip tree gained a conflict against the net-next tree. The akpm tree lost a patch that turned up elsewhere, Non-merge commits (relative to Linus' tree): 7981 8238 files changed, 332149 insertions(+), 195576 deletions(-) --

linux-next: Tree for Feb 15

2018-02-14 Thread Stephen Rothwell
Hi all, Changes since 20180214: The sound-asoc tree gained a build failure so I used the version from next-20180214. The mmc tree gained a build failure so I used the version from next-20180214. Non-merge commits (relative to Linus' tree): 1794 2149 files changed, 75703 insertions(+), 44258 de

linux-next: Tree for Feb 15

2017-02-14 Thread Stephen Rothwell
Hi all, Changes since 20170214: The net tree still had its build failure for which I applied a fix patch. The f2fs tree gained a conflict against the fscrypt tree. The rdma tree gained a build failure due to an interaction with the net-next tree for which I applied a merge fix patch. The kvm t

linux-next: Tree for Feb 15

2016-02-14 Thread Stephen Rothwell
Hi all, Changes since 20160212: The aio tree still had a build failure so I used the version from next-20160111. The akpm-current tree gained conflict against the mips tree. Non-merge commits (relative to Linus' tree): 4580 3966 files changed, 164257 insertions(+), 72564 deletions(-)

Re: linux-next: Tree for Feb 15

2013-02-15 Thread Sedat Dilek
On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 8:42 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > > News: Yesterday was the 5th anniversary of linux-next! I can't believe I > am still doing this :-) > So 5-times a happy Quentin Valentino day! > Changes since 20130214: > > New tree: drm-intel > More black roses for integra

Re: linux-next: Tree for Feb 15

2013-02-15 Thread Arend van Spriel
On 02/15/2013 08:42 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > > News: Yesterday was the 5th anniversary of linux-next! I can't > believe I am still doing this :-) Was it a big celebration? ;-) Keep up the good work. Gr. AvS -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kerne

Re: linux-next: Tree for Feb 15

2008-02-15 Thread Stephen Rothwell
Hi Andy, On Fri, 15 Feb 2008 10:01:09 + Andy Whitcroft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Thats cool except that the tags seem to be missing in your public tree. > Tags do not get pushed automatically, you have to push them manually, > perhaps they were missed? Ooops sorry. Should be right, now.

Re: linux-next: Tree for Feb 15

2008-02-15 Thread Andy Whitcroft
On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 06:31:43PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > > I have created today's linux-next tree at > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/sfr/linux-next.git. > > Between each merge, the tree was built with allmodconfig for both > powerpc and x86_64. > > You can se

linux-next: Tree for Feb 15

2008-02-14 Thread Stephen Rothwell
Hi all, I have created today's linux-next tree at git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/sfr/linux-next.git. Between each merge, the tree was built with allmodconfig for both powerpc and x86_64. You can see which trees have been included by looking in the Trees file in the source. The tr