Hi Sedat,

On Tue, 15 Feb 2011 04:34:24 +0100 Sedat Dilek [off-list ref] wrote:

On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 1:00 AM, Rusty Russell [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Mon, 14 Feb 2011 11:45:59 pm Sedat Dilek wrote:

quoted

quoted

quoted

Any idea what's going on? Stephen, Randy noticed the same like me?

Dmitry broke module parameters with a "trivial" transform which turned out
not to be.

I wasn't paying enough attention, and let it through.

quoted

My damn brain can't understand - looking at the series file in [2] -
why the hell the "possible" patch [3] is not included in linux-next?

There are markers in the series file, which indicate what goes into
linux-next.

Thanks for the explanations, it makes things seen from the
patch-management side a bit clearer.
 ( Not sure if the series files was modified in the meantime. )

Here for documentation-purposes-only (partially extracted):

[ http://ozlabs.org/~rusty/kernel/rr-latest/series ]

# NEXT_PATCHES_START
# MM_PATCHES_START
# Trivial compilation fixes.


## for-linus
virtio:virtio-net-add_schedule_check_to_napi_enable_call.patch
## for-linus end
module:deal_with_alignment_issues_in_built_in_versions.patch
module:do_not_hide_modver_version_show_declaration_behind_ifdef.patch
virtio:blk_allow_re_reading_config_space_at_runtime.patch
# MM_PATCHES_END
# NEXT_PATCHES_END

[ / http://ozlabs.org/~rusty/kernel/rr-latest/series ]

That is how it looks today.  Yesterday, the patch
module:deal_with_alignment_issues_in_built_in_parameters.patch
was also included and that is what caused the problem.

Looks to me, the FIXUP patch marked with ***** was not really applied
to linux-next?

No, instead the breaking patch (above) was removed from Rusty's
linux-next series today.

Also, this fixup patch is no more in Rusty's series file.
Is that all correct now?

Rusty has a new version of the above patch which includes the fix (I
assume) but it is not included in linux-next today.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/