Re: [Intel-gfx] linux-next: Tree for Oct 20 (gpu/drm/i915)

On 2016.10.20 21:25:03 +0300, Jani Nikula wrote: > On Thu, 20 Oct 2016, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 7:37 PM, Randy Dunlap wrote: > >> On 10/19/16 20:20, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > >>> Hi all, > >>> > >>> Changes since 20161019: > >>> >

Re: [Intel-gfx] linux-next: Tree for Oct 20 (gpu/drm/i915)

On 2016.10.20 21:25:03 +0300, Jani Nikula wrote: > On Thu, 20 Oct 2016, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 7:37 PM, Randy Dunlap wrote: > >> On 10/19/16 20:20, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > >>> Hi all, > >>> > >>> Changes since 20161019: > >>> > >> > >> on i386: when CONFIG_ACPI is not

Re: [Intel-gfx] linux-next: Tree for Oct 20 (gpu/drm/i915)

On Thu, 20 Oct 2016, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 7:37 PM, Randy Dunlap wrote: >> On 10/19/16 20:20, Stephen Rothwell wrote: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> Changes since 20161019: >>> >> >> on i386: when CONFIG_ACPI is not enabled: > > Adding

Re: [Intel-gfx] linux-next: Tree for Oct 20 (gpu/drm/i915)

On Thu, 20 Oct 2016, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 7:37 PM, Randy Dunlap wrote: >> On 10/19/16 20:20, Stephen Rothwell wrote: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> Changes since 20161019: >>> >> >> on i386: when CONFIG_ACPI is not enabled: > > Adding Zhenyu. Might be good to have a fix just for

Re: [Intel-gfx] linux-next: Tree for Oct 20 (gpu/drm/i915)

On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 7:37 PM, Randy Dunlap wrote: > On 10/19/16 20:20, Stephen Rothwell wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> Changes since 20161019: >> > > on i386: when CONFIG_ACPI is not enabled: Adding Zhenyu. Might be good to have a fix just for this that I directly pick up,

Re: [Intel-gfx] linux-next: Tree for Oct 20 (gpu/drm/i915)

On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 7:37 PM, Randy Dunlap wrote: > On 10/19/16 20:20, Stephen Rothwell wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> Changes since 20161019: >> > > on i386: when CONFIG_ACPI is not enabled: Adding Zhenyu. Might be good to have a fix just for this that I directly pick up, since I want to tag the

Re: linux-next: Tree for Oct 20 (gpu/drm/i915)

On 10/19/16 20:20, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > > Changes since 20161019: > on i386: when CONFIG_ACPI is not enabled: ../drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gvt/opregion.c: In function 'intel_gvt_init_opregion': ../drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gvt/opregion.c:183:2: error: implicit declaration of function

Re: linux-next: Tree for Oct 20 (gpu/drm/i915)

On 10/19/16 20:20, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > > Changes since 20161019: > on i386: when CONFIG_ACPI is not enabled: ../drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gvt/opregion.c: In function 'intel_gvt_init_opregion': ../drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gvt/opregion.c:183:2: error: implicit declaration of function

linux-next: Tree for Oct 20

Hi all, Changes since 20161019: The net-next tree gained a conflict against the net tree. The akpm-current tree still had its build failures for which I applied 2 patches. Non-merge commits (relative to Linus' tree): 1344 1791 files changed, 152207 insertions(+), 26046 deletions(-)

linux-next: Tree for Oct 20

Hi all, Changes since 20161019: The net-next tree gained a conflict against the net tree. The akpm-current tree still had its build failures for which I applied 2 patches. Non-merge commits (relative to Linus' tree): 1344 1791 files changed, 152207 insertions(+), 26046 deletions(-)

Re: linux-next: Tree for Oct 20 (sound/soc/intel)

On 2015年10月21日 00:46, Randy Dunlap wrote: On 10/19/15 22:26, Stephen Rothwell wrote: Hi all, Changes since 20151019: on x86_64: when CONFIG_DW_DMAC is not enabled. sound/built-in.o: In function `sst_dma_new': (.text+0xd7b38): undefined reference to `dw_dma_probe' sound/built-in.o: In

Re: linux-next: Tree for Oct 20 (sound/soc/intel)

On 2015年10月21日 00:46, Randy Dunlap wrote: On 10/19/15 22:26, Stephen Rothwell wrote: Hi all, Changes since 20151019: on x86_64: when CONFIG_DW_DMAC is not enabled. sound/built-in.o: In function `sst_dma_new': (.text+0xd7b38): undefined reference to `dw_dma_probe' sound/built-in.o: In

Re: linux-next: Tree for Oct 20 (sound/soc/intel)

On 10/19/15 22:26, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > > Changes since 20151019: > on x86_64: when CONFIG_DW_DMAC is not enabled. sound/built-in.o: In function `sst_dma_new': (.text+0xd7b38): undefined reference to `dw_dma_probe' sound/built-in.o: In function `sst_dma_free': (.text+0xd7c0a):

Re: linux-next: Tree for Oct 20 (sound/soc/intel)

On 10/19/15 22:26, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > > Changes since 20151019: > on x86_64: when CONFIG_DW_DMAC is not enabled. sound/built-in.o: In function `sst_dma_new': (.text+0xd7b38): undefined reference to `dw_dma_probe' sound/built-in.o: In function `sst_dma_free': (.text+0xd7c0a):

linux-next: Tree for Oct 20

Hi all, Changes since 20151019: My "during the merges" builds are now PowerPC hosted which only really affects the perf build since it is done natively. I used the new h8300 tree even though it is not ideal. The battery tree still had its build failure so I used the version from next-20150925.

linux-next: Tree for Oct 20

Hi all, Changes since 20151019: My "during the merges" builds are now PowerPC hosted which only really affects the perf build since it is done natively. I used the new h8300 tree even though it is not ideal. The battery tree still had its build failure so I used the version from next-20150925.

linux-next: Tree for Oct 20

Hi all, Changes since 20141017: The thermal tree lost its build failure. Non-merge commits (relative to Linus' tree): 696 684 files changed, 18935 insertions(+), 10633 deletions(-) I have created today's linux-next

linux-next: Tree for Oct 20

Hi all, Changes since 20141017: The thermal tree lost its build failure. Non-merge commits (relative to Linus' tree): 696 684 files changed, 18935 insertions(+), 10633 deletions(-) I have created today's linux-next