On Sun, Mar 21, 2021 at 1:30 PM Michael Ellerman wrote:
>
> Yes. But Monday in UTC+11 :)
Yeah :-) I'm on it.
Cheers,
Miguel
Miguel Ojeda writes:
> On Sat, Mar 20, 2021 at 7:49 AM Miguel Ojeda
> wrote:
>>
>> Reproduced on s390. However, under defconfig, one also needs to revert
>> kernel/livepatch/core.c to avoid triggering the assert, i.e.:
>
> Stephen: I will put this in rust-next so that others don't see
> problems
On Sat, Mar 20, 2021 at 6:33 AM Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>
> Daniel Axtens reported the same breakage on powerpc. I bisected it to
> the same commit. More experimentation shows that if you reverse just
> the change to include/linux/moduleparam.h the above warnings go away.
> So
>
> -#define
On Sat, Mar 20, 2021 at 7:07 AM Miguel Ojeda
wrote:
>
> Sorry for that, and thanks a lot for taking a look. For the Rust
> support I had to increase a few limits, mainly the symbol length. Let
> me check and I'll report back.
Reproduced on s390. However, under defconfig, one also needs to revert
On Sat, Mar 20, 2021 at 7:49 AM Miguel Ojeda
wrote:
>
> Reproduced on s390. However, under defconfig, one also needs to revert
> kernel/livepatch/core.c to avoid triggering the assert, i.e.:
Stephen: I will put this in rust-next so that others don't see
problems on their side and test it with a
Hi all,
On Fri, 19 Mar 2021 15:30:31 +0100 Heiko Carstens wrote:
>
> This breaks now on s390 with commit 8ef6f74a3571 ("Rust support").
> make modules_install / depmod now fails with:
>
> depmod: WARNING:
> /.../lib/modules/5.12.0-rc3-1-g8ef6f74a3571/kernel/drivers/s390/scsi/zfcp.ko
>
On Fri, Mar 19, 2021 at 05:59:50PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Warning: Some of the branches in linux-next may still based on v5.12-rc1,
> so please be careful if you are trying to bisect a bug.
>
> News: if your -next included tree is based on Linus' tree tag
>
Hi all,
Warning: Some of the branches in linux-next may still based on v5.12-rc1,
so please be careful if you are trying to bisect a bug.
News: if your -next included tree is based on Linus' tree tag
v5.12-rc1{,-dontuse} (or somewhere between v5.11 and that tag), please
consider rebasing it onto
On 3/18/19 10:12 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Changes since 20190318:
>
on i386:
ld: sound/soc/codecs/nau8810.o: in function `nau8810_set_pll':
nau8810.c:(.text+0x6e7): undefined reference to `__udivdi3'
--
~Randy
Hi all,
Changes since 20190318:
New trees: amdgpu-fixes, amdgpu
The amdgpu tree gained a conflict against Linus' tree and a build failure
for which I reverted a commit.
The drm-misc tree gained a conflict against the drm-intel tree.
The selinux tree gained a build failure so I used the
Hi all,
Changes since 20180316:
The asm-generic tree lost its build failure.
The vfs tree gained a build failure for which I reverted a commit.
The net-next tree gained a conflict against the syscalls tree.
The drm-misc tree gained a conflict against the drm tree.
The tip tree gained a
Hi all,
Changes since 20180316:
The asm-generic tree lost its build failure.
The vfs tree gained a build failure for which I reverted a commit.
The net-next tree gained a conflict against the syscalls tree.
The drm-misc tree gained a conflict against the drm tree.
The tip tree gained a
On 03/19/15 00:28, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Changes since 20150318:
>
on i386:
drivers/built-in.o: In function `dwc2_pci_remove':
pci.c:(.text+0x37ecf1): undefined reference to `usb_phy_generic_unregister'
drivers/built-in.o: In function `dwc2_pci_probe':
pci.c:(.text+0x37ee8d):
Hi all,
Changes since 20150318:
The vfs tree still had its build failure for which I applied a patch.
The spi tree gained a conflict against the slave-dma tree.
The y2038 tree gained a conflict against the staging tree.
Non-merge commits (relative to Linus' tree): 5083
4754 files changed,
Hi all,
Changes since 20150318:
The vfs tree still had its build failure for which I applied a patch.
The spi tree gained a conflict against the slave-dma tree.
The y2038 tree gained a conflict against the staging tree.
Non-merge commits (relative to Linus' tree): 5083
4754 files changed,
On 03/19/15 00:28, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
Hi all,
Changes since 20150318:
on i386:
drivers/built-in.o: In function `dwc2_pci_remove':
pci.c:(.text+0x37ecf1): undefined reference to `usb_phy_generic_unregister'
drivers/built-in.o: In function `dwc2_pci_probe':
pci.c:(.text+0x37ee8d):
Hi all,
This tree still fails (more than usual) the powerpc allyesconfig build.
Changes since 20140318:
The powerpc tree still had its build failure.
The net-next tree lost 2 of its another build failures.
The wireless-next tree lost its build failure but gained another for
which I reverted 2
Hi all,
This tree still fails (more than usual) the powerpc allyesconfig build.
Changes since 20140318:
The powerpc tree still had its build failure.
The net-next tree lost 2 of its another build failures.
The wireless-next tree lost its build failure but gained another for
which I reverted 2
On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 6:47 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, 19 Mar 2013 06:42:27 +0100 Sedat Dilek wrote:
>>
>> did forget to sent your email [1] to linux-next ML?
>
> No, and I even checked my mail server's logs and it was accepted by vger.
>
For sure - it's not in my inbox :-).
On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 6:54 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, 19 Mar 2013 16:47:48 +1100 Stephen Rothwell
> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, 19 Mar 2013 06:42:27 +0100 Sedat Dilek wrote:
>> >
>> > did forget to sent your email [1] to linux-next ML?
>>
>> No, and I even checked my mail
On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 6:54 AM, Stephen Rothwell s...@canb.auug.org.au wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, 19 Mar 2013 16:47:48 +1100 Stephen Rothwell s...@canb.auug.org.au
wrote:
On Tue, 19 Mar 2013 06:42:27 +0100 Sedat Dilek sedat.di...@gmail.com wrote:
did forget to sent your email [1] to linux-next
On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 6:47 AM, Stephen Rothwell s...@canb.auug.org.au wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, 19 Mar 2013 06:42:27 +0100 Sedat Dilek sedat.di...@gmail.com wrote:
did forget to sent your email [1] to linux-next ML?
No, and I even checked my mail server's logs and it was accepted by vger.
For
Hi,
On Tue, 19 Mar 2013 16:47:48 +1100 Stephen Rothwell
wrote:
>
> On Tue, 19 Mar 2013 06:42:27 +0100 Sedat Dilek wrote:
> >
> > did forget to sent your email [1] to linux-next ML?
>
> No, and I even checked my mail server's logs and it was accepted by vger.
Also, I received a copy via the
Hi,
On Tue, 19 Mar 2013 06:42:27 +0100 Sedat Dilek wrote:
>
> did forget to sent your email [1] to linux-next ML?
No, and I even checked my mail server's logs and it was accepted by vger.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwells...@canb.auug.org.au
pgpkZ5mbFJclq.pgp
Description: PGP
Hi all,
Changes since 20130318:
The l2-mtd tree gained a conflict against Linus' tree.
The char-misc tree still had its build failure so I used the version from
next-20130315.
The gpio tree still had its build failure for which I reverted a commit.
The workqueues tree gained a conflict
Hi all,
Changes since 20130318:
The l2-mtd tree gained a conflict against Linus' tree.
The char-misc tree still had its build failure so I used the version from
next-20130315.
The gpio tree still had its build failure for which I reverted a commit.
The workqueues tree gained a conflict
Hi,
On Tue, 19 Mar 2013 06:42:27 +0100 Sedat Dilek sedat.di...@gmail.com wrote:
did forget to sent your email [1] to linux-next ML?
No, and I even checked my mail server's logs and it was accepted by vger.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwells...@canb.auug.org.au
Hi,
On Tue, 19 Mar 2013 16:47:48 +1100 Stephen Rothwell s...@canb.auug.org.au
wrote:
On Tue, 19 Mar 2013 06:42:27 +0100 Sedat Dilek sedat.di...@gmail.com wrote:
did forget to sent your email [1] to linux-next ML?
No, and I even checked my mail server's logs and it was accepted by vger.
28 matches
Mail list logo
