lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Jun]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: linux-next: Tree for June 5

* Mike Travis <travis@sgi.com> wrote:

> The patch ordering was incorrect as I removed the node_to_cpumask_map
> before I replaced the MAX_NUMNODES, should have been the opposite.

It needed the combination 4 failures along the line: the debug check was
not complete, the ordering was bad and thus the splitup was bad as well
- and then one component went missing in linux-next and the combined
effect created this bug that needed a bisection by Andrew and Vegard to
figure out.

the moral: we now tightened the debug check, fixed the integration bug
and tightened the checks we have for patch propagation. (Thomas just
added the new tip-check-integration script to tip/tip that implements
this)

Ingo


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-06-06 17:37    [W:0.110 / U:0.620 seconds]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site