* Len Brown <lenb@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> From: Len Brown <len.brown@xxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Sun, 29 May 2011 23:38:15 -0400
> Subject: [PATCH] x86 idle: fix build warning for WARN_ONCE("idle=mwait")
>
> In 5d4c47e0195b989f284907358bd5c268a44b91c7
> "x86 idle: deprecate mwait_idle() and "idle=mwait" cmdline param"...
>
> I fat-fingered the editing when I updated the WARN_ONCE() string:
>
> arch/x86/kernel/process.c: In function 'idle_setup':
> arch/x86/kernel/process.c:645:1: warning: unknown escape sequence: '\i'
>
> remove the '\n' while we are here, it works fine without it.
>
> Signed-off-by: Len Brown <len.brown@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> arch/x86/kernel/process.c | 2 +-
> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
Len, i'd *really* prefer it if patches changing arch/x86/ had a
longer test time in linux-next than what you are gave it here.
This kind of 'send them to lkml and merge them into your linux-next
branch and send it to Linus on the same day' kind of ambush you have
done with the 'x86 idle' patches might be convenient to you, but it
is inconvenient to pretty much anyone else - and it is absolutely
unacceptable to us x86 maintainers ...
*Especially* as these patches were contentious when you last posted
them as an RFC to lkml ...
So please watch out for this in the future, ok?
Thanks,
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
