Re: inux-next: Tree for July 1

["Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>]

On Tuesday, 1 of July 2008, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> Changes since next-20080630:
> 
> New tree: ttydev - unfortunately it had to be reverted because of build
> failures after lots of conflict resolution (which may have caused the
> build failures).
> 
> Changed tree: the cris tree changed branch names.
> 
> The sched tree gained a couple of conflicts against the ftrace and
> cpus4096 trees.
> 
> The pci tree gained a conflict against the x86 tree.
> 
> The usb tree reverted due to a build failure after merging with the pci
> tree was changed for a fixup patch.
> 
> The v4l-dvb tree lost its three conflicts against Linus' tree.
> 
> The s390 tree gained a conflict against the diver-core tree.
> 
> The ide tree fixed its build problems.
> 
> The nfsd tree lost a conflict against the nfs tree.
> 
> The powerpc tree gained a conflict against the ide tree.
> 
> The net tree gained two conflicts against the powerpc tree.
> 
> The galak tree lost its conflict against the net tree.
> 
> the blk-removal tree gained a conflict against the s390 tree.
> 
> The firmware tree lost several conflicts against the net tree so didn't
> need a commit reverted any more.
> 
> Merging the ttydev tree got several conflicts against the usb and
> firmware trees.  Unfortunately, it also would not build and so was
> reverted.
> 
> I have also applied the following patches for know problems:
> 	module: fix NULL pointer dereference in find_symbol()

I can't mount NFS shares with this kernel.  I get something of this sort in
dmesg and it seems to be 100% reproducible:

[  314.058858] RPC: Registered udp transport module.
[  314.058863] RPC: Registered tcp transport module.
[  314.490970] RPC: transport (0) not supported
[  319.246987] __ratelimit: 23 messages suppressed

linux-next from yesterday was fine with the same .config .

Thanks,
Rafael