HI Luis, On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 10:05:49PM +0200, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > Andrew, > > I got a notice from Ingo on July 21 that one of my patches, "x86/mm, > asm-generic: Add IOMMU ioremap_uc() variant default" was merged into tip. It > was merged a long with other patches, for example: > > http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git/commit/drivers/video/fbdev/aty/atyfb_base.c?id=3cc2dac5be3f23414a4efdee0b26d79bed297cac > > I wrote this patch after Boris had my atyfb series bake on his tree > as his tree receives 0-day tests. Then this patch for example makes use of > ioremap_uc(): > > "drivers/video/fbdev/atyfb: Replace MTRR UC hole with strong UC" > > I noticed though that on top there's a revert of that same patch: > > http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git/commit/drivers/video/fbdev/aty/atyfb_base.c?id=4c090fb7209d523ef4cedb354192a190edd0d166 > > Revert "drivers/video/fbdev/atyfb: Replace MTRR UC hole with strong UC" akpm-base > This reverts commit 3cc2dac5be3f23414a4efdee0b26d79bed297cac. > > It doesn't explain why this was reverted though. Is it OK for things be > reverted like this ? Is it understood by others ? It was a bit of a surprise to > me though as I was not able to verify things were going through to linux-next. > Since Boris was also on vacation and since my trees do not get 0-day-tests > it also meant I realied on the chain for issues to be found. I'll fix the > fact that my trees do not get 0-day tests but it seems we should probably > only put so many dev trees on 0-day test, I'll check with Fengguang Wu if > he has bandwidth to put some of my trees. Would you tell me your git URL? I'm always seeking to add more dev trees to the 0-day test pool. Bandwidth is not a problem you need to worry. Thanks, Fengguang -- 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
