Hi all,
Changes since 20180313:
New tree: syscalls
The syscalls tree gained 2 build failures for which I reverted 2 commits.
The metag tree gained a conflict against the syscalls tree.
The drm tree still had its build failure for which I applied a patch.
The sound-asoc tree lost its build fai
On 16/03/2016 13:22, Guenter Roeck wrote:
On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 05:17:13PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 09:55:06PM +, Qais Yousef wrote:
Hi Guenter,
[ ... ]
Qemu test results:
total: 96 pass: 69 fail: 27
Failed tests:
[ ... ]
mips:mips_malta_s
On 03/16/2016 03:17 PM, Qais Yousef wrote:
On 16/03/2016 20:27, Qais Yousef wrote:
On 16/03/2016 13:22, Guenter Roeck wrote:
On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 05:17:13PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 09:55:06PM +, Qais Yousef wrote:
Hi Guenter,
[ ... ]
Qemu test results:
On 03/16/2016 03:17 PM, Qais Yousef wrote:
On 16/03/2016 20:27, Qais Yousef wrote:
On 16/03/2016 13:22, Guenter Roeck wrote:
On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 05:17:13PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 09:55:06PM +, Qais Yousef wrote:
Hi Guenter,
[ ... ]
Qemu test results:
On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 05:17:13PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 09:55:06PM +, Qais Yousef wrote:
> > Hi Guenter,
> >
[ ... ]
> > >
> > >>Qemu test results:
> > >> total: 96 pass: 69 fail: 27
> > >>Failed tests:
> > >[ ... ]
> > >> mips:mips_malta_smp_defconfig
> > >I
On 03/16/2016 10:25 PM, Qais Yousef wrote:
[ ... ]
Yeah it is assumed that a Malta should always have a GIC and no one got around
to fix this in qemu yet.
I can only improve on the patch to do
if (!ipidomain && nr_cpu_ids == 1)
return 0;
Which is more generic way to do it. I th
On 16/03/2016 20:27, Qais Yousef wrote:
On 16/03/2016 13:22, Guenter Roeck wrote:
On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 05:17:13PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 09:55:06PM +, Qais Yousef wrote:
Hi Guenter,
[ ... ]
Qemu test results:
total: 96 pass: 69 fail: 27
Failed tests
On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 09:55:06PM +, Qais Yousef wrote:
> Hi Guenter,
>
> On 15/03/2016 05:26, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> >On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 07:37:29AM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> >>On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 05:40:37PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> >>>Hi all,
> >>>
> >>>Changes since 201
Hi Guenter,
On 15/03/2016 05:26, Guenter Roeck wrote:
On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 07:37:29AM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 05:40:37PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
Hi all,
Changes since 20160311:
The vfs tree gained a conflict against Linus' tree. I also applied a
patch fo
On (03/15/16 07:43), Wolfram Sang wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I'm seeing a bunch of warnings and errors
>
> I pushed the fix to my for-next branch yesterday. Sorry for the fuzz!
no prob, thanks!
-ss
On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 09:30:29AM +0900, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> On (03/14/16 17:40), Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Changes since 20160311:
> >
> > The vfs tree gained a conflict against Linus' tree. I also applied a
> > patch for a known runtime bug.
> >
> > The tip tree gain
On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 07:37:29AM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 05:40:37PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Changes since 20160311:
> >
> > The vfs tree gained a conflict against Linus' tree. I also applied a
> > patch for a known runtime bug.
> >
> > T
On 03/14/2016 04:55 PM, Michael Ellerman wrote:
On Mon, 2016-03-14 at 07:37 -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 05:40:37PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
To give people an idea what to expect in the merge window, here are my current
build and runtime test results. Some of the ru
On (03/14/16 17:40), Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Changes since 20160311:
>
> The vfs tree gained a conflict against Linus' tree. I also applied a
> patch for a known runtime bug.
>
> The tip tree gained a conflict against the mips tree.
>
> The aio tree still had a build failure so I
On Mon, 2016-03-14 at 07:37 -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 05:40:37PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>
> To give people an idea what to expect in the merge window, here are my current
> build and runtime test results. Some of the runtime failures are due to the
> newly intro
On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 04:51:51PM +, James Morse wrote:
> Hi Guenter,
>
> On 14/03/16 14:37, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > To give people an idea what to expect in the merge window, here are my
> > current
> > build and runtime test results. Some of the runtime failures are due to the
> > newly i
Hi Guenter,
On 14/03/16 14:37, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> To give people an idea what to expect in the merge window, here are my current
> build and runtime test results. Some of the runtime failures are due to the
> newly introduced i2c bug, but many (including the arm64 boot failures) have
> been ar
On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 05:40:37PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Changes since 20160311:
>
> The vfs tree gained a conflict against Linus' tree. I also applied a
> patch for a known runtime bug.
>
> The tip tree gained a conflict against the mips tree.
>
> The aio tree still had
Hi all,
Changes since 20160311:
The vfs tree gained a conflict against Linus' tree. I also applied a
patch for a known runtime bug.
The tip tree gained a conflict against the mips tree.
The aio tree still had a build failure so I removed several commits
from it. It also gained a conflict again
Hi all,
I've uploaded -next for today. There were a couple of small issues
today, mainly due to the addition of the new compat tree, and no trees
needed reverting. This build has been tested with ARM
multi_v7_defconfig and x86 allmodconfig between each merge.
Stephen should be back on Monday an
Hi all,
Changes since 20130313:
New tree: bcon
The drm-intel tree lost its build failure.
The gpio tree still had its build failure for which I reverted a commit.
The cgroup tree lost its build failure and gained a conflict against
Linus' tree.
The workqueues tree gained a conflict against Li
21 matches
Mail list logo
