On Thu, 17 Aug 2006 00:28:53 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Thu, 17 Aug 2006 16:07:22 +0900 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> > commit 1f4c5c1fe2a6a74271989ec079af11e2bb8e2826 >> > tree a0da63a3dcc3ffd71653ecc039db416dbcaa86d4 >> > parent beada884dd437b509c26b39f1a0b0c6b31e6f340 >> > author Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 1151573360 -0700 >> > committer Tony Luck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 1151607053 -0700 >> > >> > [IA64] git-ia64 versus genirq >> > >> > Fix the git-ia64 tree after genirq merge. >> > >> > Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> > Signed-off-by: Tony Luck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >> Patch from test branch of Tony Luck's ia64 tree. >> This is needed for ia64 kexec in Linus's tree. >> > > I think you're telling us that Tony needs to get this into mainline, yes?
This would be ia64 kexec. I was thinking more along the lines that it would be nice if Zou Nan hai sent incremental patches against Tony's tree. But he probably gets more testing by sending out a apply and forget patch against 2.6.18-rc4. And certainly merging ia64 kexec into Linus' tree would be a nice resolution to this problem. At OLS Tony spoke about what state he would like to see kexec in before it is merged into Linus' tree. Basically reports that it works on at least a cople of different vendor's gear. That is proving harder than one might have hoped. But the code is marked as experimental, and if pushing it into Linus's tree both makes patch management a bit easier, and potentially gives the code better testing, then it seems like a good idea to me. -- Horms H: http://www.vergenet.net/~horms/ W: http://www.valinux.co.jp/en/ P.S. The address these patches was sent from was an error, sorry about that. _______________________________________________ fastboot mailing list [email protected] https://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/fastboot
