On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 5:36 AM, Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 05:14:24AM +0100, Sedat Dilek wrote: >> On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 4:58 AM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > Hi Sedat, >> > >> > On Tue, 15 Feb 2011 04:34:24 +0100 Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> >> >> On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 1:00 AM, Rusty Russell <rusty@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> > On Mon, 14 Feb 2011 11:45:59 pm Sedat Dilek wrote: >> >> >> >> Any idea what's going on? Stephen, Randy noticed the same like me? >> >> > >> >> > Dmitry broke module parameters with a "trivial" transform which turned out >> >> > not to be. >> >> > >> >> > I wasn't paying enough attention, and let it through. >> >> > >> >> >> My damn brain can't understand - looking at the series file in [2] - >> >> >> why the hell the "possible" patch [3] is not included in linux-next? >> >> > >> >> > There are markers in the series file, which indicate what goes into >> >> > linux-next. >> >> >> >> Thanks for the explanations, it makes things seen from the >> >> patch-management side a bit clearer. >> >> Â( Not sure if the series files was modified in the meantime. ) >> >> >> >> Here for documentation-purposes-only (partially extracted): >> >> >> >> [ http://ozlabs.org/~rusty/kernel/rr-latest/series ] >> >> >> >> # NEXT_PATCHES_START >> >> # MM_PATCHES_START >> >> # Trivial compilation fixes. >> >> >> >> >> >> ## for-linus >> >> virtio:virtio-net-add_schedule_check_to_napi_enable_call.patch >> >> ## for-linus end >> >> module:deal_with_alignment_issues_in_built_in_versions.patch >> >> module:do_not_hide_modver_version_show_declaration_behind_ifdef.patch >> >> virtio:blk_allow_re_reading_config_space_at_runtime.patch >> >> # MM_PATCHES_END >> >> # NEXT_PATCHES_END >> >> >> >> [ / http://ozlabs.org/~rusty/kernel/rr-latest/series ] >> > >> > That is how it looks today. ÂYesterday, the patch >> > module:deal_with_alignment_issues_in_built_in_parameters.patch >> > was also included and that is what caused the problem. >> > >> >> Looks to me, the FIXUP patch marked with ***** was not really applied >> >> to linux-next? >> > >> > No, instead the breaking patch (above) was removed from Rusty's >> > linux-next series today. >> > >> >> Also, this fixup patch is no more in Rusty's series file. >> >> Is that all correct now? >> > >> > Rusty has a new version of the above patch which includes the fix (I >> > assume) but it is not included in linux-next today. >> > >> > -- >> > Cheers, >> > Stephen Rothwell          Âsfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> > http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/ >> > >> >> Hmm, would be nice to have a clarification or a confirmation after >> compilation and kernel-modules are loaded correctly on i386 (amd64) >> arch(s). > > As it was proven that the change was a bit *ahem* involved it is > probably better for the updated patch (even though I am pretty sure it > is good now) to cook a bit more outside of next so Rusty removed it. > > Thanks. > > -- > Dmitry > Might be better this way. ( And yeah, it looks like "sth" was dropped according to merge.logs. ) - Sedat - P.S.: [ merge.log of next-20110215 ] ... 3270 Merging quilt/rr 3271 $ git merge quilt/rr 3272 Merge made by recursive. 3273 drivers/block/virtio_blk.c | 88 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----- 3274 include/linux/module.h | 15 ++++--- 3275 kernel/params.c | 9 +++- 3276 3 files changed, 92 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-) ... [ merge.log of next-20110214 ] ... 3315 $ git merge quilt/rr 3316 Merge made by recursive. 3317 drivers/block/virtio_blk.c | 88 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----- 3318 include/linux/module.h | 15 ++++--- 3319 include/linux/moduleparam.h | 22 ++++++----- 3320 kernel/params.c | 19 ++++++--- 3321 4 files changed, 110 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) ... - EOT - -- 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
