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:0.026 / U:60.800 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site