lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Feb]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [linux-pm] linux-next: Tree for Feb 8 [ smp|cpufreq: WARNING: at kernel/smp.c:245 smp_call_function_single ]
From
On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 4:21 PM, Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 3:56 PM, Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> wrote:
>> On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 8:18 PM, Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Nah, I pulled in latest pm-next where this commit is new...
>>>
>>> commit 8d5666f3456f2fd4a4e5dced228475b829851e53
>>> "ACPI: Unbind ACPI drv when probe failed"
>>>
>>> ...building with it.
>>>
>>> Same to you, say concretely which commit is fixing what...
>>>
>>> Pull-N-B-Happy was never my strategy... I want to understand what went
>>> wrong and have stolen my time.
>>
>> I don't have any pointers to broken tree and so can't point you to the culprit,
>> but it was this patch:
>>
>> http://git.linaro.org/gitweb?p=people/vireshk/linux.git;a=commit;h=e034e731f4d9d18ad0401f033f485a3096796c58
>>
>> minus
>>
>> the patch i sent you as attachment.
>>
>> There were some locking introduced around init/exit of cpufreq_driver, which
>> caused some drivers to break. Its fixed now in the above commit.
>
> Hmm, this "high-patch-maths" is not user-friendly!
>
> I will pull-in your tree into Linux-Next (next-20130208) and see if it
> applies cleanly.
>
> - Sedat -

No, it did NOT apply cleanly and I merged your tree like this.
To me it does not look like your changes from the patch you sent me
are included?

- Sedat -
[unhandled content-type:application/octet-stream]
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-02-08 18:21    [W:0.131 / U:1.764 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site