From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Avi Kivity Subject: Re: [PULL 00/12] ppc patch queue 2012-10-30 Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 13:17:24 +0200 Message-ID: <509108C4.9090202@redhat.com> References: <1351591345-23071-1-git-send-email-agraf@suse.de> <20121031013255.GC21986@amt.cnet> <5090FCBC.9090407@redhat.com> <02B0911D-756E-4A51-A689-7ACA2B4D6699@suse.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Marcelo Tosatti , KVM list , kvm-ppc To: Alexander Graf Return-path: In-Reply-To: <02B0911D-756E-4A51-A689-7ACA2B4D6699@suse.de> Sender: kvm-ppc-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org On 10/31/2012 12:34 PM, Alexander Graf wrote: > > > On 31.10.2012, at 11:26, Avi Kivity wrote: > >> On 10/31/2012 12:22 PM, Alexander Graf wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 31.10.2012, at 02:32, Marcelo Tosatti wrote: >>> >>>> On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 11:02:13AM +0100, Alexander Graf wrote: >>>>> Hi Avi / Marcelo, >>>>> >>>>> This is my current patch queue for ppc. Please pull. >>>>> >>>>> Headline changes are: >>>>> >>>>> * Fix 440 target >>>>> * Fix uapi conflict >>>> >>>> Can you regenerate against queue branch? (btw i forgot to update fsl_hcalls.h...). >>> >>> Hrm. So which branch am I supposed to base against? Master, next or queue? This one is against next... >> >> next and queue should be compatible (queue = next + a few patches). Are >> there any conflicts when merging against queue? > > I merely want to know which one I should work against. So far I was under the impression that next is the one. It is. queue might be rebased at times. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function