On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 12:32 AM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt
wrote:
> Allright, another one Grant:
>
> unsigned int irq_find_mapping(struct irq_domain *domain,
> irq_hw_number_t hwirq)
> {
> struct irq_data *data;
>
> /* Look for default domain if
On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 12:32 AM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt
b...@kernel.crashing.org wrote:
Allright, another one Grant:
unsigned int irq_find_mapping(struct irq_domain *domain,
irq_hw_number_t hwirq)
{
struct irq_data *data;
/* Look for default
On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 9:21 PM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt
wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-07-23 at 16:32 -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
>> > As-is I'm backing off from the linear/legacy/tree merge patch as just
>> > too risky. I've already pulled that stuff out of linux-next.
>>
>> Can I pull you pseries fix
On Mon, 2012-07-23 at 16:32 -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
> > As-is I'm backing off from the linear/legacy/tree merge patch as just
> > too risky. I've already pulled that stuff out of linux-next.
>
> Can I pull you pseries fix into my tree (my preference), or do I need
> to rebase on top of yours?
On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 4:31 PM, Grant Likely wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 4:26 PM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt
> wrote:
>> On Mon, 2012-07-23 at 01:59 -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
>>> My tree must be rebased to eliminate bisect breakage. The existing
>>> commits in my tree have the breakage, and
On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 4:26 PM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt
wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-07-23 at 01:59 -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
>> My tree must be rebased to eliminate bisect breakage. The existing
>> commits in my tree have the breakage, and fiddling with the merge
>> order doesn't affect that. I don't
On Mon, 2012-07-23 at 01:59 -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
> My tree must be rebased to eliminate bisect breakage. The existing
> commits in my tree have the breakage, and fiddling with the merge
> order doesn't affect that. I don't want to rebase though. The safest
> approach (smallest window of
On Sun, Jul 22, 2012 at 8:45 PM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt
wrote:
> On Sat, 2012-07-21 at 19:47 -0700, Hugh Dickins wrote:
>> I have to revert the patch below from mmotm 2012-07-20-16-30 or
>> next-20120720 in order to boot on the PowerPC G5: otherwise it
>> freezes before switching to the
On Mon, 23 Jul 2012, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Sat, 2012-07-21 at 19:47 -0700, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> > I have to revert the patch below from mmotm 2012-07-20-16-30 or
> > next-20120720 in order to boot on the PowerPC G5: otherwise it
> > freezes before switching to the framebuffer console
Allright, another one Grant:
unsigned int irq_find_mapping(struct irq_domain *domain,
irq_hw_number_t hwirq)
{
struct irq_data *data;
/* Look for default domain if nececssary */
if (domain == NULL)
domain = irq_default_domain;
Allright, another one Grant:
unsigned int irq_find_mapping(struct irq_domain *domain,
irq_hw_number_t hwirq)
{
struct irq_data *data;
/* Look for default domain if nececssary */
if (domain == NULL)
domain = irq_default_domain;
On Mon, 23 Jul 2012, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
On Sat, 2012-07-21 at 19:47 -0700, Hugh Dickins wrote:
I have to revert the patch below from mmotm 2012-07-20-16-30 or
next-20120720 in order to boot on the PowerPC G5: otherwise it
freezes before switching to the framebuffer console - but
On Sun, Jul 22, 2012 at 8:45 PM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt
b...@kernel.crashing.org wrote:
On Sat, 2012-07-21 at 19:47 -0700, Hugh Dickins wrote:
I have to revert the patch below from mmotm 2012-07-20-16-30 or
next-20120720 in order to boot on the PowerPC G5: otherwise it
freezes before switching
On Mon, 2012-07-23 at 01:59 -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
My tree must be rebased to eliminate bisect breakage. The existing
commits in my tree have the breakage, and fiddling with the merge
order doesn't affect that. I don't want to rebase though. The safest
approach (smallest window of
On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 4:26 PM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt
b...@kernel.crashing.org wrote:
On Mon, 2012-07-23 at 01:59 -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
My tree must be rebased to eliminate bisect breakage. The existing
commits in my tree have the breakage, and fiddling with the merge
order doesn't
On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 4:31 PM, Grant Likely grant.lik...@secretlab.ca wrote:
On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 4:26 PM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt
b...@kernel.crashing.org wrote:
On Mon, 2012-07-23 at 01:59 -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
My tree must be rebased to eliminate bisect breakage. The existing
On Mon, 2012-07-23 at 16:32 -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
As-is I'm backing off from the linear/legacy/tree merge patch as just
too risky. I've already pulled that stuff out of linux-next.
Can I pull you pseries fix into my tree (my preference), or do I need
to rebase on top of yours?
The
On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 9:21 PM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt
b...@kernel.crashing.org wrote:
On Mon, 2012-07-23 at 16:32 -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
As-is I'm backing off from the linear/legacy/tree merge patch as just
too risky. I've already pulled that stuff out of linux-next.
Can I pull you
On Sat, 2012-07-21 at 19:47 -0700, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> I have to revert the patch below from mmotm 2012-07-20-16-30 or
> next-20120720 in order to boot on the PowerPC G5: otherwise it
> freezes before switching to the framebuffer console - but I'm
> not certain where because that initial console
On Sun, 22 Jul 2012, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Sat, 2012-07-21 at 19:47 -0700, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> > I have to revert the patch below from mmotm 2012-07-20-16-30 or
> > next-20120720 in order to boot on the PowerPC G5: otherwise it
> > freezes before switching to the framebuffer console
On Sat, 2012-07-21 at 19:47 -0700, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> I have to revert the patch below from mmotm 2012-07-20-16-30 or
> next-20120720 in order to boot on the PowerPC G5: otherwise it
> freezes before switching to the framebuffer console - but I'm
> not certain where because that initial console
On Sat, 2012-07-21 at 19:47 -0700, Hugh Dickins wrote:
I have to revert the patch below from mmotm 2012-07-20-16-30 or
next-20120720 in order to boot on the PowerPC G5: otherwise it
freezes before switching to the framebuffer console - but I'm
not certain where because that initial console
On Sun, 22 Jul 2012, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
On Sat, 2012-07-21 at 19:47 -0700, Hugh Dickins wrote:
I have to revert the patch below from mmotm 2012-07-20-16-30 or
next-20120720 in order to boot on the PowerPC G5: otherwise it
freezes before switching to the framebuffer console - but
On Sat, 2012-07-21 at 19:47 -0700, Hugh Dickins wrote:
I have to revert the patch below from mmotm 2012-07-20-16-30 or
next-20120720 in order to boot on the PowerPC G5: otherwise it
freezes before switching to the framebuffer console - but I'm
not certain where because that initial console
I have to revert the patch below from mmotm 2012-07-20-16-30 or
next-20120720 in order to boot on the PowerPC G5: otherwise it
freezes before switching to the framebuffer console - but I'm
not certain where because that initial console doesn't scroll
(there are mpic messages at bottom and at top
I have to revert the patch below from mmotm 2012-07-20-16-30 or
next-20120720 in order to boot on the PowerPC G5: otherwise it
freezes before switching to the framebuffer console - but I'm
not certain where because that initial console doesn't scroll
(there are mpic messages at bottom and at top
26 matches
Mail list logo
