From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2013 10:54:16 -0500 From: Ben Myers To: Stephen Rothwell Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the final tree Message-ID: <20130821155416.GH5262@sgi.com> References: <20130820172052.1f0d89ddf6a1a40ef70333fd@canb.auug.org.au> <20130820120702.000b044e@oracle.com> <20130820192844.GC5262@sgi.com> <20130821102246.4e3c4c8fe549d8c7760da96d@canb.auug.org.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <20130821102246.4e3c4c8fe549d8c7760da96d@canb.auug.org.au> Cc: cbe-oss-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, Arnd Bergmann , Dwight Engen , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, xfs@oss.sgi.com, linux-next@vger.kernel.org, Jeremy Kerr , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, Gao feng List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Hey Stephen, On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 10:22:46AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > On Tue, 20 Aug 2013 14:28:44 -0500 Ben Myers wrote: > > I'd prefer not to break Stephen's tree two days in a row. We could just revert > > d6970d4b726c in the xfs tree for the time being as Stephen has done, but given > > the choice would prefer the fix. Do you have a preference between the two > > approaches that Dwight has posted? The first seems more conservative... > > I will automatically revert that commit when I merge the xfs tree until > some other solution is forthcoming (so you don't have to do the revert in > the xfs tree). Gah. That makes sense. ;) > This does need to be fixed fairly soon, though. Agreed, thanks. -Ben