Thread (53 messages) 53 messages, 6 authors, 2008-06-18

Re: linux-next: Tree for June 5

From: Ingo Molnar <hidden>
Date: 2008-06-06 15:34:18
Also in: lkml

* Mike Travis [off-list ref] wrote:
The patch ordering was incorrect as I removed the node_to_cpumask_map 
before I replaced the MAX_NUMNODES, should have been the opposite.
It needed the combination 4 failures along the line: the debug check was 
not complete, the ordering was bad and thus the splitup was bad as well 
- and then one component went missing in linux-next and the combined 
effect created this bug that needed a bisection by Andrew and Vegard to 
figure out.

the moral: we now tightened the debug check, fixed the integration bug 
and tightened the checks we have for patch propagation. (Thomas just 
added the new tip-check-integration script to tip/tip that implements 
this)

	Ingo
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help