From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755002Ab1JMMiO (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Oct 2011 08:38:14 -0400 Received: from usmamail.tilera.com ([206.83.70.75]:51622 "EHLO USMAMAIL.TILERA.COM" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751762Ab1JMMiN (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Oct 2011 08:38:13 -0400 Message-ID: <4E96DBB2.9020104@tilera.com> Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 08:38:10 -0400 From: Chris Metcalf User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:7.0.1) Gecko/20110929 Thunderbird/7.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Linus Torvalds CC: Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] arch/tile update for 3.1 References: <4E94B9FD.5030500@tilera.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 10/13/2011 2:31 AM, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 9:49 AM, Chris Metcalf wrote: >> Please pull the following trivial change for 3.1 from: >> >> git://github.com/cmetcalf-tilera/linux-tile.git stable >> >> This change allows 3.1-rc9 to build for the Tile architecture. A bombing >> of to erroneously modified a couple >> of places where we were relying on some assembly constants in the tile >> . Thanks! > This is not *at*all* what I get when I pull that branch. > > I get a merge and two other commits too. > > Not pulled. Mea culpa. I've fixed the tree, so if you could pull again, it should now have what the original message described. No doubt my screwup is just a variant on a story you've heard more than a few times, but for the record, here's some detail. I saw the extra two commits, which made no sense to me, so I examined one of the files that the request-pull message described as different and saw no difference, so I assumed it was just some minor confusion (maybe due to github vs kernel.org). Turns out that commit was a duplicate that had been in my tree since June that I'd forgotten about, and the merge represented git merging in the same semantic commit from a different tree. So, I've now rolled back my stable tree to June, re-applied just the patch I wanted you to pull, and retested the tree -- and confirmed that git request-pull actually now produces the output in my earlier email. I'll make sure this doesn't happen again. -- Chris Metcalf, Tilera Corp. http://www.tilera.com