From: Pasha Tatashin
Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2017 13:27:38 -0400
> Should I send this change to sparc ml for discussion?
It's in the review pile on patchwork, there is nothing more for
you to do other than to be patient.
Hi David and Andrew,
Should I send this change to sparc ml for discussion?
Thank you,
Pasha
On 03/29/2017 01:43 AM, David Miller wrote:
From: Stephen Rothwell
Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2017 16:37:46 +1100
3f506bf2a354 ("sparc64: NG4 memset 32 bits overflow")
Andrew, this change still needs dis
From: Stephen Rothwell
Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2017 16:37:46 +1100
> 3f506bf2a354 ("sparc64: NG4 memset 32 bits overflow")
Andrew, this change still needs discussion and review and I intended
to push it via my tree once everything was sorted out.
Thank you.
Hi Andrew,
Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in:
arch/sparc/lib/NG4memset.S
between commit:
0ae2d26ffe70 ("arch/sparc: Avoid DCTI Couples")
from the sparc tree and commit:
3f506bf2a354 ("sparc64: NG4 memset 32 bits overflow")
from the akpm-current tree.
From: David Howells
Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2014 11:32:44 +
> Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>
>> Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in
>> drivers/sbus/char/jsflash.c between commit 967f038e491b ("Sparc:
>> sparc_cpu_model isn't in asm/system.h any more [ver #2]") from the
Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in
> drivers/sbus/char/jsflash.c between commit 967f038e491b ("Sparc:
> sparc_cpu_model isn't in asm/system.h any more [ver #2]") from the sparc
> tree and commit 695f43eb1721 ("asm/system.h: sparc: sparc_c
Hi Andrew,
Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in
drivers/sbus/char/jsflash.c between commit 967f038e491b ("Sparc:
sparc_cpu_model isn't in asm/system.h any more [ver #2]") from the sparc
tree and commit 695f43eb1721 ("asm/system.h: sparc: sparc_cpu_model isn't
in asm/
7 matches
Mail list logo
