From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Len Brown Subject: Re: drivers/x86 (Was: Re: linux-next: Tree for November 28 (misc/tc1100)) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2008 23:29:14 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: References: <20081128213620.2ec593d4.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <4930307C.30106@oracle.com> <20081129083550.3c23af37.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <20081129093414.GB26691@elte.hu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Return-path: Received: from vms173003pub.verizon.net ([206.46.173.3]:57313 "EHLO vms173003pub.verizon.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751698AbYLAE3Z (ORCPT ); Sun, 30 Nov 2008 23:29:25 -0500 In-reply-to: <20081129093414.GB26691@elte.hu> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Stephen Rothwell , Len Brown , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, LKML , Randy Dunlap , x86@kernel.org On Sat, 29 Nov 2008, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > > Hi Len, > > > > On Fri, 28 Nov 2008 09:55:08 -0800 Randy Dunlap wrote: > > > > > > make[2]: *** No rule to make target `drivers/misc/tc1100-wmi.o', needed by `drivers/misc/built-in.o'. > > > > > > on allmodconfig & allyesconfig for i386. > > > > > > On, moved to drivers/x86/. Someone needs to clean up drivers/misc/Makefile. > > > > Just wondering where the move to drivers/x86 was discussed, (reviewed > > and tested) and why the change is in the acpi tree and not the x86 > > tree? > > it will all conflict with pending bits in the x86 tree, so i'd prefer if > Len did this atomically after 2.6.29-rc1, without it having this > long-term breakage effect. Is linux-next running into a conflict between x86 and the acpi tree today? thanks, -Len