Hi all,
News: there will be no linux-next release tomorrow.
Changes since 20210122:
The reset tree gained a conflict against the arm-soc tree.
The openrisc tree gained a conflict against Linus' tree.
The risc-v tree gained a conflict against the arm-soc tree.
The bpf-next tree gained a confli
On 1/24/19 8:35 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Changes since 20190124:
>
on x86_64:
~
CC drivers/extcon/extcon-ptn5150.o
../drivers/extcon/extcon-ptn5150.c: In function ‘ptn5150_irq_work’:
../drivers/extcon/extcon-ptn5150.c:130:5: error: implicit declaration of
function ‘
Hi all,
Changes since 20190124:
The vfs tree still had its build failure for which I applied a patch.
Non-merge commits (relative to Linus' tree): 3454
3915 files changed, 114384 insertions(+), 72024 deletions(-)
I h
Hi all,
There will be no linux-next release until Monday (next-20170130).
Changes since 20170124:
New tree: extable
The drm tree still had its build failure so I used the version from
next-20170123.
The userns tree gained a conflict against the selinux tree.
The kselftest tree gained a confli
Hi all,
On Mon, 25 Jan 2016 13:11:41 +1100 Stephen Rothwell
wrote:
>
> On Mon, 25 Jan 2016 12:32:48 +1100 Stephen Rothwell
> wrote:
> >
> > Please do not add any material for v4.6 to your linux-next included
> > branches until after v4.5-rc1 is released.
>
> It has been pointed out that thi
Hi all,
On Mon, 25 Jan 2016 12:32:48 +1100 Stephen Rothwell
wrote:
>
> Please do not add any material for v4.6 to your linux-next included
> branches until after v4.5-rc1 is released.
It has been pointed out that this is no longer relevant.
> Changes since 20160122:
Also, I forgot to mention
Hi all,
Please do not add any material for v4.6 to your linux-next included
branches until after v4.5-rc1 is released.
Changes since 20160122:
The mips tree gained a conflict against Linus' tree.
The aio tree still had a build failure so I used the version from
next-20160111.
Non-merge commits
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 11:06:11PM +0100, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> I don't see that git-bisect session as a time of waste, but two hints:
>
> 1. People should sent their patches concerning especially Linux-Next
> fixes not only to LKML but also to (if
> this is not known, pointing to James).
>
> 2.
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 11:08 PM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello, Sedat.
>
> On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 11:06:11PM +0100, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>> 1. People should sent their patches concerning especially Linux-Next
>> fixes not only to LKML but also to (if
>> this is not known, pointing to James).
>>
>> 2.
Hello, Sedat.
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 11:06:11PM +0100, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> 1. People should sent their patches concerning especially Linux-Next
> fixes not only to LKML but also to (if
> this is not known, pointing to James).
>
> 2. These patches for Linux-Next should contain a "-next" in thei
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 8:28 PM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello, guys.
>
> On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 02:01:50PM +0100, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>> OK, that bisecting ruined a bit my weekend and showed me again you
>> cannot really bisect Linux-Next.
>> Sometimes, it is better not to trust the tools blindly and
Hello, guys.
On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 02:01:50PM +0100, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> OK, that bisecting ruined a bit my weekend and showed me again you
> cannot really bisect Linux-Next.
> Sometimes, it is better not to trust the tools blindly and do a
> bisect-on-suspicion.
> Anyway... cultprit found... p
On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 10:49 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Saturday, January 26, 2013 07:27:06 PM Sedat Dilek wrote:
>> On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 4:05 PM, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>> > On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 3:33 PM, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>> >> On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 2:24 PM, Sedat Dilek
>> >> wro
On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 1:46 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 08:53:58 -0800 Randy Dunlap wrote:
>>
>> Seeing lots of this error on i386:
>>
>> arch/x86/kvm/emulate.c:1016: Error: unsupported for `push'
>
> Caused by commit 9ae9febae950 ("KVM: x86 emulator: covert SETCC to
> fast
On Saturday, January 26, 2013 07:27:06 PM Sedat Dilek wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 4:05 PM, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> > On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 3:33 PM, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> >> On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 2:24 PM, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> >>> On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 2:25 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> >
On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 4:05 PM, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 3:33 PM, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>> On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 2:24 PM, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>>> On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 2:25 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Saturday, January 26, 2013 12:10:32 PM Sedat Dilek wrote:
>
On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 3:33 PM, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 2:24 PM, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>> On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 2:25 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>>> On Saturday, January 26, 2013 12:10:32 PM Sedat Dilek wrote:
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 6:26 AM, Stephen Rothwell
wr
On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 2:24 PM, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 2:25 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>> On Saturday, January 26, 2013 12:10:32 PM Sedat Dilek wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 6:26 AM, Stephen Rothwell
>>> wrote:
>>> > Hi all,
>>> >
>>> > Changes since 20130124:
>>>
On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 2:25 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Saturday, January 26, 2013 12:10:32 PM Sedat Dilek wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 6:26 AM, Stephen Rothwell
>> wrote:
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > Changes since 20130124:
>> >
>> > New trees: ipsec and ipsec-next
>> >
>> > The powerpc t
On Saturday, January 26, 2013 12:10:32 PM Sedat Dilek wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 6:26 AM, Stephen Rothwell
> wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Changes since 20130124:
> >
> > New trees: ipsec and ipsec-next
> >
> > The powerpc tree still had a build failure.
> >
> > The sound-asoc tree still had i
On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 12:10 PM, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 6:26 AM, Stephen Rothwell
> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Changes since 20130124:
>>
>> New trees: ipsec and ipsec-next
>>
>> The powerpc tree still had a build failure.
>>
>> The sound-asoc tree still had its build failure
On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 08:53:58 -0800 Randy Dunlap wrote:
>
> Seeing lots of this error on i386:
>
> arch/x86/kvm/emulate.c:1016: Error: unsupported for `push'
Caused by commit 9ae9febae950 ("KVM: x86 emulator: covert SETCC to
fastop") from the kvm tree. cc's added.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
On 01/24/13 21:26, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Changes since 20130124:
>
Seeing lots of this error on i386:
arch/x86/kvm/emulate.c:1016: Error: unsupported for `push'
--
~Randy
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
Hi all,
Changes since 20130124:
New trees: ipsec and ipsec-next
The powerpc tree still had a build failure.
The sound-asoc tree still had its build failure so I used the version from
next-20130122.
The akpm tree lost its build failure and several patches that turned up
elsewhere.
24 matches
Mail list logo
