On 11/3/20 10:01 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Changes since 20201103:
>
on x86_64:
CONFIG_QCOM_RPMH=m
CONFIG_REGULATOR_QCOM_RPMH=y
ld: drivers/regulator/qcom-rpmh-regulator.o: in function
`rpmh_regulator_send_request':
qcom-rpmh-regulator.c:(.text+0x106): undefined reference to
Hi all,
Changes since 20201103:
The drm-intel-fixes tree gained a build failure for which I reverted a commit.
The imx-mxs tree lost its build failure.
The f2fs tree lost its build failure.
The net-next tree gained a conflict against the net tree.
The pinctrl tree still had its build
On 11/04/2015 01:43 PM, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> On 11/03/15 22:38, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Please do *not* add any material intended for v4.5 to your linux-next
>> included branches until after v4.4-rc1 has been released.
>>
>> Changes since 20151103:
>>
>
>
> on x86_64:
>
>
On 11/03/15 22:38, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Please do *not* add any material intended for v4.5 to your linux-next
> included branches until after v4.4-rc1 has been released.
>
> Changes since 20151103:
>
on x86_64:
drivers/built-in.o: In function `setup_earlycon':
On 11/04/2015 01:43 PM, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> On 11/03/15 22:38, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Please do *not* add any material intended for v4.5 to your linux-next
>> included branches until after v4.4-rc1 has been released.
>>
>> Changes since 20151103:
>>
>
>
> on x86_64:
>
>
On 11/03/15 22:38, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Please do *not* add any material intended for v4.5 to your linux-next
> included branches until after v4.4-rc1 has been released.
>
> Changes since 20151103:
>
on x86_64:
drivers/built-in.o: In function `setup_earlycon':
Hi all,
Please do *not* add any material intended for v4.5 to your linux-next
included branches until after v4.4-rc1 has been released.
Changes since 20151103:
The battery tree still had its build failure so I used the version from
next-20150925.
The mailbox tree still had its build failure so
Hi all,
Please do *not* add any material intended for v4.5 to your linux-next
included branches until after v4.4-rc1 has been released.
Changes since 20151103:
The battery tree still had its build failure so I used the version from
next-20150925.
The mailbox tree still had its build failure so
On Tue, 2014-11-04 at 22:56 +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Hi Stephen, Michael,
>
> On Tue, Nov 4, 2014 at 7:36 AM, Stephen Rothwell
> wrote:
> > Status of my local build tests will be at
> > http://kisskb.ellerman.id.au/linux-next . If maintainers want to give
> > advice about cross
Hi Stephen, Michael,
On Tue, Nov 4, 2014 at 7:36 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Status of my local build tests will be at
> http://kisskb.ellerman.id.au/linux-next . If maintainers want to give
> advice about cross compilers/configs that work, we are always open to add
> more builds.
Looks like
On Tue, Nov 04, 2014 at 05:36:24PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Changes since 20141103:
>
> The mfd tree gained a build failure for which I reverted a commit.
>
> The scsi tree lost its build failure, but gained another so I used the
> version from next-20141031.
>
> Non-merge
On Tue, Nov 04, 2014 at 05:36:24PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
Hi all,
Changes since 20141103:
The mfd tree gained a build failure for which I reverted a commit.
The scsi tree lost its build failure, but gained another so I used the
version from next-20141031.
Non-merge commits
Hi Stephen, Michael,
On Tue, Nov 4, 2014 at 7:36 AM, Stephen Rothwell s...@canb.auug.org.au wrote:
Status of my local build tests will be at
http://kisskb.ellerman.id.au/linux-next . If maintainers want to give
advice about cross compilers/configs that work, we are always open to add
more
On Tue, 2014-11-04 at 22:56 +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
Hi Stephen, Michael,
On Tue, Nov 4, 2014 at 7:36 AM, Stephen Rothwell s...@canb.auug.org.au
wrote:
Status of my local build tests will be at
http://kisskb.ellerman.id.au/linux-next . If maintainers want to give
advice about
Hi all,
Changes since 20141103:
The mfd tree gained a build failure for which I reverted a commit.
The scsi tree lost its build failure, but gained another so I used the
version from next-20141031.
Non-merge commits (relative to Linus' tree): 3170
2579 files changed, 83652 insertions(+),
Hi all,
Changes since 20141103:
The mfd tree gained a build failure for which I reverted a commit.
The scsi tree lost its build failure, but gained another so I used the
version from next-20141031.
Non-merge commits (relative to Linus' tree): 3170
2579 files changed, 83652 insertions(+),
Hi all,
Changes since 20131101:
The squashfs tree lost its build failure.
The sound-asoc tree gained a build failure for which I reverted a commit.
The modules tree introduced a very large number of warnings so I used
the version from next-20131101.
The block tree still had its build failure
Hi all,
Changes since 20131101:
The squashfs tree lost its build failure.
The sound-asoc tree gained a build failure for which I reverted a commit.
The modules tree introduced a very large number of warnings so I used
the version from next-20131101.
The block tree still had its build failure
18 matches
Mail list logo
