From: linux@arm.linux.org.uk (Russell King - ARM Linux)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: arm: JUMP_LABEL and DEBUG_SET_MODULE_RONX should be mutually exclusive?
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 23:09:43 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20141015220943.GK27405@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAGXu5jLEAjR+X0KnnipGH2gp569_PFp5DYyfgXU=Szxgk5EcpA@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 08:34:17AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 5:21 AM, Paolo Pisati <p.pisati@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > i keep hitting this with BRIDGE=m, JUMP_LABEL=y and DEBUG_SET_MODULE_RONX=y:
>
> I think my RO/NX patch series solves this. I sent a pull request, but
> I haven't seen any movement on it. :(
Sorry Kees.
However, even if I had looked at it, I would /not/ have been able to
pull it. It does the absolutely fatal thing for any pull request:
The following changes since commit cc31d8f887953e9824c4d9333b15c335ee7d1b65:
Merge branches 'fiq' (early part), 'fixes' and 'misc' into for-next (2014-09-2+6 14:40:19 +0100)
That commit is on my "for-next" branch. The clue is in the name. :)
Just like trying to base commits onto the linux-next tree, trying to
base commits on an aggregate branch intended for linux-next usage
doesn't work for all the same reasons.
The commit which ultimately ended up being merged was:
commit d5d16892243e7755da706d03b34da85ea6a74117
Merge: 3467e765a592 ad684dce87fa f3354ab67476 421520ba9829
Author: Russell King <rmk+kernel@arm.linux.org.uk>
Date: Thu Oct 2 21:47:02 2014 +0100
Merge branches 'fiq' (early part), 'fixes', 'l2c' (early part) and 'misc' into for-next
compared to the one you based on:
commit cc31d8f887953e9824c4d9333b15c335ee7d1b65
Merge: 3467e765a592 5ca918e5e3f9 e16343c47e42
Author: Russell King <rmk+kernel@arm.linux.org.uk>
Date: Fri Sep 26 14:40:19 2014 +0100
Merge branches 'fiq' (early part), 'fixes' and 'misc' into for-next
So, although "fiq" was the same, "fixes" had additional commits added,
an additional "l2c" branch was added, and two additional commits in "misc".
The reason why I publish a "for-next" branch is exactly so I don't have
to push out lots of individual branches, and then have to tell SFR which
branches he needs to pull on a regular basis. "for-next" is an aggregate
unstable branch solely intended to be pulled into linux-next (and thus
inspected by others.)
--
FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: currently at 9.5Mbps down 400kbps up
according to speedtest.net.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-10-15 22:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-10-15 12:21 arm: JUMP_LABEL and DEBUG_SET_MODULE_RONX should be mutually exclusive? Paolo Pisati
2014-10-15 15:34 ` Kees Cook
2014-10-15 19:55 ` Jason Baron
2014-10-15 22:09 ` Russell King - ARM Linux [this message]
2014-10-15 22:21 ` Kees Cook
2014-10-15 22:36 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2014-10-16 21:47 ` Kees Cook
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=20141015220943.GK27405@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk \
--to=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox