Randy Dunlap writes:
> On 2/22/21 10:35 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Please do not add any changes destined for v5.13 to your linux-next
>> included branches until after v5.12-rc1 has been released.
>>
>> Changes since 20210222:
>>
>
> Still seeing this build error on x86_64:
>
On 2/22/21 10:35 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Please do not add any changes destined for v5.13 to your linux-next
> included branches until after v5.12-rc1 has been released.
>
> Changes since 20210222:
>
Still seeing this build error on x86_64:
ERROR: modpost: "iwl_so_trans_cfg"
Hi all,
Please do not add any changes destined for v5.13 to your linux-next
included branches until after v5.12-rc1 has been released.
Changes since 20210222:
The kbuild tree gained a conflict against Linus' tree and lost its
build failure.
The pci tree gained a conflict against Linus' tree.
T
Hi all,
Changes since 20180222:
New tree: nds32
The kvms390 tree gained a conflict against the nds32 tree.
The staging tree gained a conflict against Linus' tree.
The akpm-current tree lost its build failure.
Non-merge commits (relative to Linus' tree): 3167
3757 files changed, 146492 insert
Hi all,
Please do not add any material intended for v4.12 to your linux-next
included branches until after v4.11-rc1 has been released.
Changes since 20170222:
Removed tree: extable (all finished with)
The md tree gained a conflict against Linus' tree.
The scsi tree inherited the build failure
Hi all,
Changes since 20160222:
The f2fs tree gained complex conflicts against Linus' tree for which I
dropped a commit from the f2fs tree.
The aio tree still had a build failure so I used the version from
next-20160111.
Non-merge commits (relative to Linus' tree): 6427
5239 files changed, 238
On 02/23/2015 13:36, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> On 02/22/15 19:09, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Please do not add any material destined for v3.21 to your linux-next
>> included trees until after v3.20-rc1 has been released.
>>
>> OK, so that was interesting :-) v4.0-rc1 is out, so go crazy
On 02/22/15 19:09, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Please do not add any material destined for v3.21 to your linux-next
> included trees until after v3.20-rc1 has been released.
>
> OK, so that was interesting :-) v4.0-rc1 is out, so go crazy ...
>
> Changes since 20150222:
>
> *crickets
Hi all,
Please do not add any material destined for v3.21 to your linux-next
included trees until after v3.20-rc1 has been released.
OK, so that was interesting :-) v4.0-rc1 is out, so go crazy ...
Changes since 20150222:
*crickets*
Non-merge commits (relative to Linus' tree): 829
527 files
On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 11:28:03AM -0800, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> On 02/24/13 21:00, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Please do not add any work destined for v3.10 to your -next included
> > branches until after Linus has release v3.9-rc1.
> >
> > Changes since 20130222:
> >
>
>
> on
Hello,
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 12:51:22AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> [Cc'ing Andrew just in case he was going to send the offending patch on
> to Linus soon ...]
>
> On Wed, 27 Feb 2013 14:23:51 +0100 Sedat Dilek wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 10:39 AM, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> > > On
[Cc'ing Andrew just in case he was going to send the offending patch on
to Linus soon ...]
On Wed, 27 Feb 2013 14:23:51 +0100 Sedat Dilek wrote:
>
> On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 10:39 AM, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 2:44 PM, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> >>
> >> With today's Linux-Next I s
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 10:39 AM, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 2:44 PM, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>> On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 6:00 AM, Stephen Rothwell
>> wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> Please do not add any work destined for v3.10 to your -next included
>>> branches until after Linus has r
h "Revert "shmem_setup_file(): use d_alloc_pseudo() instead of
>> d_alloc()"" I do NOT see these warnings anymore.
>
> Umm... Are the perf ones you are seeing eliminated by that as well? I would
> expect them to be an independent problem...
Independent as I still
On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 03:22:03PM +0100, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 2:54 PM, Al Viro wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 02:22:42PM +0100, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> >
> >> [ 120.310366] Root dentry has weird name
> >
> > Umm... Almost certainly a result of switching to shmem_file_s
On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 02:22:42PM +0100, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> [ 120.310366] Root dentry has weird name
Umm... Almost certainly a result of switching to shmem_file_setup() to
d_alloc_pseudo(); I'll fix it (give the suckers ->d_op of their own).
For now, just ignore the warning - it's harmless.
Hi all,
Please do not add any work destined for v3.10 to your -next included
branches until after Linus has release v3.9-rc1.
Changes since 20130222:
The metag tree gained a conflict against Linus' tree.
The kbuild tree gained a build failure so I used the version from
next-20130222.
The drm t
17 matches
Mail list logo
