Hi all,
Changes since 20200618:
My fixes tree contains:
4cb4bfffe2c1 ("device_cgroup: Fix RCU list debugging warning")
Linus tree showed a build failure (because I started using gcc plugins)
for which I cherry-picked a commit from the tip tree.
The printk tree gained a build failure so I
Hi all,
Changes since 20190620:
The samsung-krzk tree gained a conflict against the arm tree.
The fbdev tree still had its build failure so I used the version from
next-20190619.
The net-next tree still had its build failure for which I reverted a commit.
The block tree gained a build failure
Hi all,
Changes since 20180620:
Non-merge commits (relative to Linus' tree): 1541
1590 files changed, 50624 insertions(+), 26914 deletions(-)
I have created today's linux-next tree at
Hi all,
Changes since 20180620:
Non-merge commits (relative to Linus' tree): 1541
1590 files changed, 50624 insertions(+), 26914 deletions(-)
I have created today's linux-next tree at
Hi all,
Changes since 20170620:
New tree: dma-mapping-hch
The file-locks tree gained a conflict against the uuid tree.
The v4l-dvb tree gained a build failure so I used the version from
next-20170620.
The net-next tree gained conflicts against the net and pci trees.
The spi-nor tree gained a
Hi all,
Changes since 20170620:
New tree: dma-mapping-hch
The file-locks tree gained a conflict against the uuid tree.
The v4l-dvb tree gained a build failure so I used the version from
next-20170620.
The net-next tree gained conflicts against the net and pci trees.
The spi-nor tree gained a
On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 04:43:15PM -0400, Chris Metcalf wrote:
> It turns out there were a few places where we were #include'ing Linux
> headers in the gcc build (asm/unistd.h, arch/icache.h, arch/spr_def.h).
> I patched gcc to provide inline copies of what was needed (pretty simple
> stuff and
On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 04:43:15PM -0400, Chris Metcalf wrote:
> It turns out there were a few places where we were #include'ing Linux
> headers in the gcc build (asm/unistd.h, arch/icache.h, arch/spr_def.h).
> I patched gcc to provide inline copies of what was needed (pretty simple
> stuff and
On 6/21/2016 5:14 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Tuesday, June 21, 2016 8:50:48 PM CEST Peter Zijlstra wrote:
So what's your build process for the cross tools, by the way? I'm assuming
you're not doing a total bootstrap cross-tool build since you'd need minimal
kernel headers (linux/errno.h or
On 6/21/2016 5:14 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Tuesday, June 21, 2016 8:50:48 PM CEST Peter Zijlstra wrote:
So what's your build process for the cross tools, by the way? I'm assuming
you're not doing a total bootstrap cross-tool build since you'd need minimal
kernel headers (linux/errno.h or
On 6/22/2016 5:16 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 02:36:34PM -0400, Chris Metcalf wrote:
>On 6/21/2016 2:28 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 07:29:18PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >
> >>>OK, I seem to have a tilepro-linux-gcc-6.1.1 build done. Lets see
On 6/22/2016 5:16 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 02:36:34PM -0400, Chris Metcalf wrote:
>On 6/21/2016 2:28 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 07:29:18PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >
> >>>OK, I seem to have a tilepro-linux-gcc-6.1.1 build done. Lets see
On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 02:36:34PM -0400, Chris Metcalf wrote:
> On 6/21/2016 2:28 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 07:29:18PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >
> >>>OK, I seem to have a tilepro-linux-gcc-6.1.1 build done. Lets see if I
> >>>can build me a kernel with it.
> >The
On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 02:36:34PM -0400, Chris Metcalf wrote:
> On 6/21/2016 2:28 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 07:29:18PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >
> >>>OK, I seem to have a tilepro-linux-gcc-6.1.1 build done. Lets see if I
> >>>can build me a kernel with it.
> >The
On Tuesday, June 21, 2016 8:50:48 PM CEST Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> > So what's your build process for the cross tools, by the way? I'm assuming
> > you're not doing a total bootstrap cross-tool build since you'd need minimal
> > kernel headers (linux/errno.h or whatever) in that case. I assume
On Tuesday, June 21, 2016 8:50:48 PM CEST Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> > So what's your build process for the cross tools, by the way? I'm assuming
> > you're not doing a total bootstrap cross-tool build since you'd need minimal
> > kernel headers (linux/errno.h or whatever) in that case. I assume
On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 02:36:34PM -0400, Chris Metcalf wrote:
> On 6/21/2016 2:28 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >I had to s/__atomic_fetch/__atomic32_fetch/ to avoid a namespace clash
> >with the builtin C11 atomic primitives.
> >
> >You want me to rename them all to regain consistent naming?
>
>
On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 02:36:34PM -0400, Chris Metcalf wrote:
> On 6/21/2016 2:28 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >I had to s/__atomic_fetch/__atomic32_fetch/ to avoid a namespace clash
> >with the builtin C11 atomic primitives.
> >
> >You want me to rename them all to regain consistent naming?
>
>
On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 08:50:48PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> I've no idea; I use this thing:
>
> git://git.infradead.org/users/segher/buildall.git
>
> Although I've got some local modifications, none are to the actual
> toolchain building part (although I suppose I should send segher a
>
On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 08:50:48PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> I've no idea; I use this thing:
>
> git://git.infradead.org/users/segher/buildall.git
>
> Although I've got some local modifications, none are to the actual
> toolchain building part (although I suppose I should send segher a
>
On 6/21/2016 2:28 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 07:29:18PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>OK, I seem to have a tilepro-linux-gcc-6.1.1 build done. Lets see if I
>can build me a kernel with it.
The below, much larger than desired, patch seems to make it go again.
I had to
On 6/21/2016 2:28 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 07:29:18PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>OK, I seem to have a tilepro-linux-gcc-6.1.1 build done. Lets see if I
>can build me a kernel with it.
The below, much larger than desired, patch seems to make it go again.
I had to
On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 07:29:18PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> OK, I seem to have a tilepro-linux-gcc-6.1.1 build done. Lets see if I
> can build me a kernel with it.
The below, much larger than desired, patch seems to make it go again.
I had to s/__atomic_fetch/__atomic32_fetch/ to avoid a
On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 07:29:18PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> OK, I seem to have a tilepro-linux-gcc-6.1.1 build done. Lets see if I
> can build me a kernel with it.
The below, much larger than desired, patch seems to make it go again.
I had to s/__atomic_fetch/__atomic32_fetch/ to avoid a
On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 07:06:07PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 11:26:19AM -0400, Chris Metcalf wrote:
> > This has been true since gcc 4.x when tilepro support was first added.
> >
> > In any case if you replace the #include with
> >
> > #define __NR_FAST_cmpxchg
On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 07:06:07PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 11:26:19AM -0400, Chris Metcalf wrote:
> > This has been true since gcc 4.x when tilepro support was first added.
> >
> > In any case if you replace the #include with
> >
> > #define __NR_FAST_cmpxchg
On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 11:26:19AM -0400, Chris Metcalf wrote:
> On 6/21/2016 10:14 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 04:04:08PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >>>I'm not sure who builds the toolchains, but tilepro is in upstream
> >>>gcc/binutils/etc
> >>>so should be easy
On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 11:26:19AM -0400, Chris Metcalf wrote:
> On 6/21/2016 10:14 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 04:04:08PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >>>I'm not sure who builds the toolchains, but tilepro is in upstream
> >>>gcc/binutils/etc
> >>>so should be easy
On 6/21/2016 10:14 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 04:04:08PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
I'm not sure who builds the toolchains, but tilepro is in upstream
gcc/binutils/etc
so should be easy enough to include. There's also a cross-toolchain for x64 I
put
up a while ago
On 6/21/2016 10:14 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 04:04:08PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
I'm not sure who builds the toolchains, but tilepro is in upstream
gcc/binutils/etc
so should be easy enough to include. There's also a cross-toolchain for x64 I
put
up a while ago
On 6/21/2016 10:14 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 04:04:08PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
I'm not sure who builds the toolchains, but tilepro is in upstream
gcc/binutils/etc
so should be easy enough to include. There's also a cross-toolchain for x64 I
put
up a while ago
On 6/21/2016 10:14 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 04:04:08PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
I'm not sure who builds the toolchains, but tilepro is in upstream
gcc/binutils/etc
so should be easy enough to include. There's also a cross-toolchain for x64 I
put
up a while ago
On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 04:14:35PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 04:04:08PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > I'm not sure who builds the toolchains, but tilepro is in upstream
> > > gcc/binutils/etc
> > > so should be easy enough to include. There's also a
On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 04:14:35PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 04:04:08PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > I'm not sure who builds the toolchains, but tilepro is in upstream
> > > gcc/binutils/etc
> > > so should be easy enough to include. There's also a
On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 09:47:00AM -0400, Chris Metcalf wrote:
> On 6/21/2016 8:42 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 08:08:29AM -0400, Chris Metcalf wrote:
> >>You need to have a tilepro toolchain (not tilegx)
> >Ah, should I go use TARGET=tilepro-linux ?
>
> Yes.
> I'm not
On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 09:47:00AM -0400, Chris Metcalf wrote:
> On 6/21/2016 8:42 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 08:08:29AM -0400, Chris Metcalf wrote:
> >>You need to have a tilepro toolchain (not tilegx)
> >Ah, should I go use TARGET=tilepro-linux ?
>
> Yes.
> I'm not
On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 10:20:39AM -0400, Chris Metcalf wrote:
> On 6/21/2016 10:14 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 04:04:08PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >>>I'm not sure who builds the toolchains, but tilepro is in upstream
> >>>gcc/binutils/etc
> >>>so should be easy
On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 10:20:39AM -0400, Chris Metcalf wrote:
> On 6/21/2016 10:14 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 04:04:08PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >>>I'm not sure who builds the toolchains, but tilepro is in upstream
> >>>gcc/binutils/etc
> >>>so should be easy
On 6/21/2016 8:42 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 08:08:29AM -0400, Chris Metcalf wrote:
You need to have a tilepro toolchain (not tilegx)
Ah, should I go use TARGET=tilepro-linux ?
Yes.
and build with ARCH=tilepro.
tilepro)
ARCH=tile
On 6/21/2016 8:42 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 08:08:29AM -0400, Chris Metcalf wrote:
You need to have a tilepro toolchain (not tilegx)
Ah, should I go use TARGET=tilepro-linux ?
Yes.
and build with ARCH=tilepro.
tilepro)
ARCH=tile
On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 04:04:08PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > I'm not sure who builds the toolchains, but tilepro is in upstream
> > gcc/binutils/etc
> > so should be easy enough to include. There's also a cross-toolchain for
> > x64 I put
> > up a while ago [1] that you could grab if you
On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 04:04:08PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > I'm not sure who builds the toolchains, but tilepro is in upstream
> > gcc/binutils/etc
> > so should be easy enough to include. There's also a cross-toolchain for
> > x64 I put
> > up a while ago [1] that you could grab if you
On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 08:08:29AM -0400, Chris Metcalf wrote:
>
> On inspection, I note that the arch/tile/include/atomic_32.h header has
>
> ATOMIC64_OP(and)
> ATOMIC64_OP(or)
> ATOMIC64_OP(xor)
>
> but these should be ATOMIC64_OPS, plural.
Bugger, I'll go fix. Clearly nobody has tilepro
On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 08:08:29AM -0400, Chris Metcalf wrote:
>
> On inspection, I note that the arch/tile/include/atomic_32.h header has
>
> ATOMIC64_OP(and)
> ATOMIC64_OP(or)
> ATOMIC64_OP(xor)
>
> but these should be ATOMIC64_OPS, plural.
Bugger, I'll go fix. Clearly nobody has tilepro
On 6/21/2016 3:01 AM, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
On Tuesday 21 June 2016 06:46 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
Hi all,
Changes since 20160620:
tilepro defconfig is failing while doing "make prepare" and bisect shows the
first bad commit as:
1af5de9af138 ("locking/atomic, arch/tile: Implement
On 6/21/2016 3:01 AM, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
On Tuesday 21 June 2016 06:46 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
Hi all,
Changes since 20160620:
tilepro defconfig is failing while doing "make prepare" and bisect shows the
first bad commit as:
1af5de9af138 ("locking/atomic, arch/tile: Implement
On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 09:58:28AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 08:01:36AM +0100, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
>
> > tilepro defconfig is failing while doing "make prepare" and bisect shows the
> > first bad commit as:
> >
> > 1af5de9af138 ("locking/atomic, arch/tile:
On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 09:58:28AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 08:01:36AM +0100, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
>
> > tilepro defconfig is failing while doing "make prepare" and bisect shows the
> > first bad commit as:
> >
> > 1af5de9af138 ("locking/atomic, arch/tile:
On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 08:01:36AM +0100, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
> tilepro defconfig is failing while doing "make prepare" and bisect shows the
> first bad commit as:
>
> 1af5de9af138 ("locking/atomic, arch/tile: Implement
> atomic{,64}_fetch_{add,sub,and,or,xor}()")
>
> You can find today's
On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 08:01:36AM +0100, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
> tilepro defconfig is failing while doing "make prepare" and bisect shows the
> first bad commit as:
>
> 1af5de9af138 ("locking/atomic, arch/tile: Implement
> atomic{,64}_fetch_{add,sub,and,or,xor}()")
>
> You can find today's
On Tuesday 21 June 2016 06:46 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
Hi all,
Changes since 20160620:
tilepro defconfig is failing while doing "make prepare" and bisect shows
the first bad commit as:
1af5de9af138 ("locking/atomic, arch/tile: Implement
atomic{,64}_fetch_{add,sub,and,or,xor}()")
You
On Tuesday 21 June 2016 06:46 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
Hi all,
Changes since 20160620:
tilepro defconfig is failing while doing "make prepare" and bisect shows
the first bad commit as:
1af5de9af138 ("locking/atomic, arch/tile: Implement
atomic{,64}_fetch_{add,sub,and,or,xor}()")
You
Hi all,
Changes since 20160620:
The net-next tree gained conflicts against the arm-doc tree.
The akpm-current tree gained a conflict against the arm-soc tree.
Non-merge commits (relative to Linus' tree): 4462
4490 files changed, 203456 insertions(+), 78511 deletions(-)
Hi all,
Changes since 20160620:
The net-next tree gained conflicts against the arm-doc tree.
The akpm-current tree gained a conflict against the arm-soc tree.
Non-merge commits (relative to Linus' tree): 4462
4490 files changed, 203456 insertions(+), 78511 deletions(-)
Hi all,
Changes since 20150620:
The drm tree gained a conflict against Linus' tree.
Non-merge commits (relative to Linus' tree): 11654
9752 files changed, 1021167 insertions(+), 230410 deletions(-)
I have created
Hi all,
Changes since 20150620:
The drm tree gained a conflict against Linus' tree.
Non-merge commits (relative to Linus' tree): 11654
9752 files changed, 1021167 insertions(+), 230410 deletions(-)
I have created
On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 10:19 AM, Vineet Gupta wrote:
> Ping ?
>
> It seems 3.11 is pretty close to releasing but we stil have LTP msgctl08
> causing a
> hang (atleast on ARC) for both linux-next 20130829 as well as Linus tree.
>
> So far, I haven't seemed to have drawn attention of people
Ping ?
It seems 3.11 is pretty close to releasing but we stil have LTP msgctl08
causing a
hang (atleast on ARC) for both linux-next 20130829 as well as Linus tree.
So far, I haven't seemed to have drawn attention of people involved.
-Vineet
On 08/29/2013 01:22 PM, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> On Thu,
Ping ?
It seems 3.11 is pretty close to releasing but we stil have LTP msgctl08
causing a
hang (atleast on ARC) for both linux-next 20130829 as well as Linus tree.
So far, I haven't seemed to have drawn attention of people involved.
-Vineet
On 08/29/2013 01:22 PM, Sedat Dilek wrote:
On Thu,
On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 10:19 AM, Vineet Gupta vineet...@gmail.com wrote:
Ping ?
It seems 3.11 is pretty close to releasing but we stil have LTP msgctl08
causing a
hang (atleast on ARC) for both linux-next 20130829 as well as Linus tree.
So far, I haven't seemed to have drawn attention of
On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 9:21 AM, Vineet Gupta
wrote:
> On 08/29/2013 08:34 AM, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 1:58 PM, Vineet Gupta
>> wrote:
>>> Hi David,
>>>
>>> On 06/26/2013 04:59 AM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
On Tue, 2013-06-25 at 23:41 +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> On
On 08/29/2013 08:34 AM, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 1:58 PM, Vineet Gupta
> wrote:
>> Hi David,
>>
>> On 06/26/2013 04:59 AM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
>>> On Tue, 2013-06-25 at 23:41 +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote:
On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 10:33 PM, Davidlohr Bueso
wrote:
>
On 08/29/2013 08:34 AM, Sedat Dilek wrote:
On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 1:58 PM, Vineet Gupta
vineet.gup...@synopsys.com wrote:
Hi David,
On 06/26/2013 04:59 AM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
On Tue, 2013-06-25 at 23:41 +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote:
On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 10:33 PM, Davidlohr Bueso
On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 9:21 AM, Vineet Gupta
vineet.gup...@synopsys.com wrote:
On 08/29/2013 08:34 AM, Sedat Dilek wrote:
On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 1:58 PM, Vineet Gupta
vineet.gup...@synopsys.com wrote:
Hi David,
On 06/26/2013 04:59 AM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
On Tue, 2013-06-25 at 23:41
On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 1:58 PM, Vineet Gupta
wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> On 06/26/2013 04:59 AM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
>> On Tue, 2013-06-25 at 23:41 +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 10:33 PM, Davidlohr Bueso
>>> wrote:
On Tue, 2013-06-25 at 18:10 +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote:
Hi David,
On 06/26/2013 04:59 AM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-06-25 at 23:41 +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 10:33 PM, Davidlohr Bueso
>> wrote:
>>> On Tue, 2013-06-25 at 18:10 +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>>> [...]
>>>
I did some more testing with
Hi David,
On 06/26/2013 04:59 AM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
On Tue, 2013-06-25 at 23:41 +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote:
On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 10:33 PM, Davidlohr Bueso
davidlohr.bu...@hp.com wrote:
On Tue, 2013-06-25 at 18:10 +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote:
[...]
I did some more testing with
On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 1:58 PM, Vineet Gupta
vineet.gup...@synopsys.com wrote:
Hi David,
On 06/26/2013 04:59 AM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
On Tue, 2013-06-25 at 23:41 +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote:
On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 10:33 PM, Davidlohr Bueso
davidlohr.bu...@hp.com wrote:
On Tue, 2013-06-25
On Tue, 2013-06-25 at 23:41 +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 10:33 PM, Davidlohr Bueso
> wrote:
> > On Tue, 2013-06-25 at 18:10 +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> > [...]
> >
> >> I did some more testing with Linux-Testing-Project (release:
> >> ltp-full-20130503) and next-20130624
On Tue, 2013-06-25 at 18:10 +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote:
[...]
> I did some more testing with Linux-Testing-Project (release:
> ltp-full-20130503) and next-20130624 (Monday) which has still the
> issue, here.
>
> If I revert the mentioned two commits from my local
>
On Tue, 2013-06-25 at 18:10 +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote:
[...]
I did some more testing with Linux-Testing-Project (release:
ltp-full-20130503) and next-20130624 (Monday) which has still the
issue, here.
If I revert the mentioned two commits from my local
On Tue, 2013-06-25 at 23:41 +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote:
On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 10:33 PM, Davidlohr Bueso
davidlohr.bu...@hp.com wrote:
On Tue, 2013-06-25 at 18:10 +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote:
[...]
I did some more testing with Linux-Testing-Project (release:
ltp-full-20130503) and
On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 8:22 AM, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> On 06/21/13 01:17, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Happy solstice!
>>
>> Changes since 20130620:
>>
>
> when CONFIG_INET is not enabled:
>
> CC net/openvswitch/flow.o
> In file included from net/openvswitch/flow.c:43:0:
>
On Sat, Jun 22, 2013 at 12:54 AM, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 22, 2013 at 12:07 AM, Davidlohr Bueso
> wrote:
>> On Fri, 2013-06-21 at 21:34 +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 10:17 AM, Stephen Rothwell
>>> wrote:
>>> > Hi all,
>>> >
>>> > Happy solstice!
>>> >
>>> >
On Sat, Jun 22, 2013 at 1:11 AM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> On Sat, 2013-06-22 at 00:54 +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>> On Sat, Jun 22, 2013 at 12:07 AM, Davidlohr Bueso
>> wrote:
>> > On Fri, 2013-06-21 at 21:34 +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>> >> On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 10:17 AM, Stephen Rothwell
>>
On Sat, 2013-06-22 at 00:54 +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 22, 2013 at 12:07 AM, Davidlohr Bueso
> wrote:
> > On Fri, 2013-06-21 at 21:34 +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> >> On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 10:17 AM, Stephen Rothwell
> >> wrote:
> >> > Hi all,
> >> >
> >> > Happy solstice!
> >> >
>
On Sat, Jun 22, 2013 at 12:07 AM, Davidlohr Bueso
wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-06-21 at 21:34 +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>> On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 10:17 AM, Stephen Rothwell
>> wrote:
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > Happy solstice!
>> >
>> > Changes since 20130620:
>> >
>> > Dropped tree: mailbox (really bad
On Fri, 2013-06-21 at 21:34 +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 10:17 AM, Stephen Rothwell
> wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Happy solstice!
> >
> > Changes since 20130620:
> >
> > Dropped tree: mailbox (really bad merge conflicts with the arm-soc tree)
> >
> > The net-next tree
On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 10:17 AM, Stephen Rothwell
wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Happy solstice!
>
> Changes since 20130620:
>
> Dropped tree: mailbox (really bad merge conflicts with the arm-soc tree)
>
> The net-next tree gained a conflict against the net tree.
>
> The leds tree still had its build
.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for Jun 21 (infiniband: qib)
>
> On 06/21/13 01:17, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Happy solstice!
> >
> > Changes since 20130620:
> >
>
>
> on x86_64:
>
> when CONFIG_SMP
On 06/21/13 01:17, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Happy solstice!
>
> Changes since 20130620:
>
on x86_64:
when CONFIG_SMP is not enabled:
(from qib.h:)
#ifdef CONFIG_INFINIBAND_QIB_DCA
struct qib_irq_notify {
int rcv;
void *arg;
struct irq_affinity_notify
On 06/21/13 01:17, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Happy solstice!
>
> Changes since 20130620:
>
when CONFIG_INET is not enabled:
CC net/openvswitch/flow.o
In file included from net/openvswitch/flow.c:43:0:
include/net/ip_tunnels.h: In function 'tunnel_ip_select_ident':
On 06/21/13 01:17, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
Hi all,
Happy solstice!
Changes since 20130620:
when CONFIG_INET is not enabled:
CC net/openvswitch/flow.o
In file included from net/openvswitch/flow.c:43:0:
include/net/ip_tunnels.h: In function 'tunnel_ip_select_ident':
: linux-next: Tree for Jun 21 (infiniband: qib)
On 06/21/13 01:17, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
Hi all,
Happy solstice!
Changes since 20130620:
on x86_64:
when CONFIG_SMP is not enabled:
(from qib.h:)
#ifdef CONFIG_INFINIBAND_QIB_DCA
struct qib_irq_notify {
int rcv
On 06/21/13 01:17, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
Hi all,
Happy solstice!
Changes since 20130620:
on x86_64:
when CONFIG_SMP is not enabled:
(from qib.h:)
#ifdef CONFIG_INFINIBAND_QIB_DCA
struct qib_irq_notify {
int rcv;
void *arg;
struct irq_affinity_notify notify;
On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 10:17 AM, Stephen Rothwell s...@canb.auug.org.au
wrote:
Hi all,
Happy solstice!
Changes since 20130620:
Dropped tree: mailbox (really bad merge conflicts with the arm-soc tree)
The net-next tree gained a conflict against the net tree.
The leds tree still had its
On Fri, 2013-06-21 at 21:34 +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote:
On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 10:17 AM, Stephen Rothwell s...@canb.auug.org.au
wrote:
Hi all,
Happy solstice!
Changes since 20130620:
Dropped tree: mailbox (really bad merge conflicts with the arm-soc tree)
The net-next tree
On Sat, Jun 22, 2013 at 12:07 AM, Davidlohr Bueso
davidlohr.bu...@hp.com wrote:
On Fri, 2013-06-21 at 21:34 +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote:
On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 10:17 AM, Stephen Rothwell s...@canb.auug.org.au
wrote:
Hi all,
Happy solstice!
Changes since 20130620:
Dropped tree:
On Sat, 2013-06-22 at 00:54 +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote:
On Sat, Jun 22, 2013 at 12:07 AM, Davidlohr Bueso
davidlohr.bu...@hp.com wrote:
On Fri, 2013-06-21 at 21:34 +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote:
On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 10:17 AM, Stephen Rothwell s...@canb.auug.org.au
wrote:
Hi all,
On Sat, Jun 22, 2013 at 1:11 AM, Davidlohr Bueso davidlohr.bu...@hp.com wrote:
On Sat, 2013-06-22 at 00:54 +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote:
On Sat, Jun 22, 2013 at 12:07 AM, Davidlohr Bueso
davidlohr.bu...@hp.com wrote:
On Fri, 2013-06-21 at 21:34 +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote:
On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at
On Sat, Jun 22, 2013 at 12:54 AM, Sedat Dilek sedat.di...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Jun 22, 2013 at 12:07 AM, Davidlohr Bueso
davidlohr.bu...@hp.com wrote:
On Fri, 2013-06-21 at 21:34 +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote:
On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 10:17 AM, Stephen Rothwell s...@canb.auug.org.au
wrote:
On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 8:22 AM, Randy Dunlap rdun...@infradead.org wrote:
On 06/21/13 01:17, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
Hi all,
Happy solstice!
Changes since 20130620:
when CONFIG_INET is not enabled:
CC net/openvswitch/flow.o
In file included from net/openvswitch/flow.c:43:0:
92 matches
Mail list logo
