Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the mm-hotfixes tree

[Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1377 bytes --]

Hi Andrew,

On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 18:23:04 -0800 Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 13 Dec 2022 09:34:24 +0800 Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com> wrote:
> 
> > Hi, this patch relays on Tony Luck's Patch series "Copy-on-write poison 
> > recovery".[1]
> > and tested ppc64_defconfig based on next-20221208, it's no build failure  
> 
> I reordered these a couple of days ago, not sure how Stephen got a hold
> of this tree - perhaps I wasn't pushy enough.

Probably, its just what I got when I fetched your branches this morning
(my time).

> Stephen, quoting the mm-everything tag would be helpful, but rarely
> useful so only if you're feeling bored ;)

OK, I will try to remember.

Part of the problem (for me) is that you sometimes update all your
branches in the middle of my day (I am not asking you to stop doing
that - I can cope), so the mm-hotifxes that I have merged early on does
not match the new mm-hotfixes-* branches that get merged as part of mm
(mm-everything) later in the day.  This occasionally causes conflicts,
but they are invariably trivial and fixed by using the versions of
files from the new branches.  I am wondering if maybe I should merge
mm-everything early (but after I have merged and tested all the -fixes
branches) to narrow the race condition :-)

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]