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 [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
