On Sun, 13 Dec 2015 22:12:24 +0100 gregor herrmann <gre...@debian.org> wrote:
> Control: tag -1 - pending
> On Mon, 14 Dec 2015 08:05:22 +1100, Ian Wienand wrote:
> > The patch has not been applied because it is not clear it is correct
> > There is a thread that starts at  and ended inconclusively at 
> > It's unfortunate that the number of people who understand power memory
> > ordering
> > issues at the level required can probably be counted on one hand. But I
> > don't
> > think we should apply patches upstream feel don't address the issue
> > -i
> > 
> > http://www.hpl.hp.com/hosted/linux/mail-archives/gc/2014-January/005825.html
> > 
> > http://www.hpl.hp.com/hosted/linux/mail-archives/gc/2014-February/005852.html
> Thanks for this additional information.
> I've cancelled the aforementioned NMU.
The last version had failed on armel, powerpc and ppc64el. I gave it back and it
built on armel and powerpc, but it failed on ppc64el (gave it back twice there):
Dunno if you want to close this bug or retitle it.
Has there been any progress on a fix for ppc64el?