On Saturday 24 March 2012, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 12:22:56PM +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > I've just re-merged the build tree for the nightly builds so it's now > > based on v3.3, and pulled in the latest for-next from arm-soc. > > > > I notice that the problem I reported earlier (see the "arm-soc + rmk's > > tree boot failure on OMAP4430SDP" thread), which results in OMAP > > being totally unable to boot, is still present. > > > > As far as I'm concerned, as long as this remains unfixed in arm-soc, > > arm-soc is not to push any branch containing the broken commit > > (3ec2decb) upstream. > > Just noticed that the fix for this has already been pushed into mainline. > So, what this means is that anyone trying to bisect across this merge > window with an OMAP platform will hit a range of commits which just won't > boot. That's really great stuff when the merge window contains the most > probable set of commits for causing issues which would need to be bisected. I had already pulled the omap_dss2 branch from Tomi into the next/cleanup branch of arm-soc, in order to resolve a bunch of merge conflicts that we discussed earlier. This should limit the number of broken commits in the history to five, and I could reduce that further to two commits if I rebuild the next/cleanup branch in a different order, but I think it's not worth it for that. I definitely agree that the cleanup branches need a little more care. The idea is really that large bug harmless changes go in there, also to help simplify the bisection process. If stuff breaks in the cleanups, I consider that worse than bugs that come in through new code. Arnd -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
