On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 10:17 AM, Mike Galbraith <bitbucket@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, 2014-01-20 at 09:42 +0100, Sedat Dilek wrote: >> On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 4:51 AM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > On Sat, 18 Jan 2014 10:46:06 +0100 Mike Galbraith <bitbucket@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> >> >> I hope it doesn't look quite like that, next-20140117 is -ENOBOOT on >> >> Q6600 box. See below for an alternative. >> >> >> >> idle: kill unnecessary mwait_idle() resched IPIs >> > >> > OK, so despite even further discussion, I have applied this as a merge >> > fix patch for today. Let me know when it is all sorted out. >> > >> >> Where is this fix? > > If you pull next-20140120, the fix is in it. > >> ( Browsing Linux-next remote GIT repository online. ) >> 2x NOPE for me. > > Probably because it's a temporary conflict fix. > It's about the handling of fixes for -next. For such kind of "special" tweaks Stephen introduced *next-fixes* (see his email on linux-next ML and [1]). Such make-my-system-boot-again and other critical fixes belong there. BTW, I found the merge hunk (see my other email). - Sedat - [1] http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/sfr/next-fixes.git -- 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
