* Dean Nelson <dcn@xxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 01:25:55PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > > On Mon, 9 Feb 2009 10:25:20 -0600 > > Dean Nelson <dcn@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > Fix the ia64 build error that occurs in the linux-next tree by introducing > > > an ia64 version of uv.h. Additionally, clean up the usage of is_uv_system(). > > > > Would I be correct in believing that this repairs (and should be folded > > into) > > > > commit 5b221278d61e3907a5e4104a844b63bc8bb3d43a > > Author: Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx> > > Date: Wed Jan 21 11:30:07 2009 +0100 > > > > x86: uv cleanup, build fix #2 > > > > ? > > > > (it looks like 5b221278d61e3907a5e4104a844b63bc8bb3d43a should be > > folded into something else, too. What hath we wrought?) > > Yes, it does fix an issue introduced by: > > commit: bdbcdd48883940bbd8d17eb01172d58a261a413a > author: Tejun Heo <tj@xxxxxxxxxx> > date: Wed, 21 Jan 2009 08:26:06 +0000 > > x86: uv cleanup > > which the commit you mention above attempted to fix. > > I'll leave it to you and Ingo to determine whether my patch should be > folded into Ingo's or Tejun's patch. > > Ingo, I see that you've applied my patch to your tip tree. What are > your thoughts on Andrew's question? What question was that? Folding back across that distance is not possible in a Git workflow. I do regular cross-builds - the build bug did not trigger with the ia64 defconfig. Ingo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
