From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure in Linus' tree Date: Tue, 1 Jun 2010 10:07:19 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: References: <20100528105719.a356ba4f.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <20100530104303.15864d35.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: Received: from smtp1.linux-foundation.org ([140.211.169.13]:52187 "EHLO smtp1.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751282Ab0FARLc (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Jun 2010 13:11:32 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Tony Luck Cc: Stephen Rothwell , Andrew Morton , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jack Steiner , Lee Schermerhorn On Tue, 1 Jun 2010, Tony Luck wrote: > On Sat, May 29, 2010 at 5:43 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > So, is it reasonable for me to ask you to revert commit > > 0ac0c0d0f837c499afd02a802f9cf52d3027fa3b ("cpusets: randomize node = rotor > > used in cpuset_mem_spread_node()")? =A0Reverting it won't break ia6= 4 (since > > their fix was to just add code that would then be unreferenced). >=20 > If that's the way you go - then just revert commit > 4ec37de89d8c758ee8115e0e64b3f994910789ee > too. I only put that in to get the ia64 build working > when 0ac0c0d went upstream. I did. See commit b3f2f6cd1ff935ecac9a5346904b899d7af689fe. Although I left the non-__node_random parts, which seemed to be an=20 independent compile fix.=20 Linus