From: "Raúl Porcel" <armin76@gentoo.org>
To: Adrian Bunk <bunk@kernel.org>
Cc: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org,
Ivan Kokshaysky <ink@jurassic.park.msu.ru>,
klausman@gentoo.org, Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
rth@twiddle.net
Subject: Re: [ALPHA] 2.6.28-rc fails to compile
Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2008 12:59:56 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <49200B3C.7020203@gentoo.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20081029141909.GC9108@cs181140183.pp.htv.fi>
Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 06:59:35AM -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
>> On Wed, 29 Oct 2008 15:45:53 +0200
>> Adrian Bunk <bunk@kernel.org> wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 06:27:41AM -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
>>>> Andrew has a patch for this in his tree for a while... I was
>>>> assuming he'd do a patchdump to Linus late in -rc1 but it seems not
>>>> to have happened..
>>> The basic problem for the Alpha build errors are circular #include's
>>> (that are anyway a pretty bad thing), and I'm currently attacking
>>> that problem (it seems to be surprisingly easy).
>>>
>>> That's IMHO better than the patch in -mm that uninlines
>>> pci_ioremap_bar().
>> and in my opinion the uninline is nicer ;)
>> Because that means we can add more checks to it over time without
>> bloating the kernel.
>
> My usage of the word "better" was wrong.
>
> For fixing the compile error I do consider the patch I'm currently
> testing as better, since this could otherwise beat us again in the
> future.
>
> But the patches are completely orthogonal, and there's no reason against
> including both.
>
> cu
> Adrian
>
Any news? Something i could test?
rc5 still fails, just FYI :)
prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-11-16 11:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-10-29 9:56 [ALPHA] 2.6.28-rc fails to compile Raúl Porcel
2008-10-29 10:03 ` Adrian Bunk
2008-10-29 10:03 ` Adrian Bunk
2008-10-29 10:13 ` Raúl Porcel
2008-10-29 10:13 ` Raúl Porcel
2008-10-29 10:19 ` Raúl Porcel
2008-10-29 10:19 ` Raúl Porcel
2008-10-29 13:27 ` Arjan van de Ven
2008-10-29 13:27 ` Arjan van de Ven
2008-10-29 13:45 ` Adrian Bunk
2008-10-29 13:59 ` Arjan van de Ven
2008-10-29 14:19 ` Adrian Bunk
2008-11-16 11:59 ` Raúl Porcel [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=49200B3C.7020203@gentoo.org \
--to=armin76@gentoo.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=arjan@infradead.org \
--cc=bunk@kernel.org \
--cc=ink@jurassic.park.msu.ru \
--cc=jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org \
--cc=klausman@gentoo.org \
--cc=linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rth@twiddle.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.