From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755903AbYDIPE0 (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Apr 2008 11:04:26 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753984AbYDIPES (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Apr 2008 11:04:18 -0400 Received: from mx3.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.1.138]:42801 "EHLO mx3.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753956AbYDIPES (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Apr 2008 11:04:18 -0400 Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2008 17:03:33 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: Cyrill Gorcunov Cc: Stephen Rothwell , Jacek Luczak , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, LKML Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for April 9 Message-ID: <20080409150333.GA24451@elte.hu> References: <20080409185309.b94c9d15.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <20080409210936.ec8ea986.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <20080409212719.7d834c13.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <20080409113109.GA25186@elte.hu> <20080409145058.GA7648@cvg> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080409145058.GA7648@cvg> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) X-ELTE-VirusStatus: clean X-ELTE-SpamScore: -1.5 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-1.5 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.2.3 -1.5 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Cyrill Gorcunov wrote: > | > It seems that commit 883a9fc4e5d9b0701f15d4e5a23608f942104721 > | > ("x86: cleanup - rename VM_MASK to X86_VM_MASK") from the x86 tree > | > seems to have missed some places. > | > | i think what happened is that some changes came in from other trees > | that reintroduced the old symbols? > > actually, that is the only explanation I could find. The last time I > sent you patches to fixup *all* VM_MASK (wich were grep'ed on *latest > branch over *all* sources inside x86). So this all were settled down > by a few of my patches and /for shame on me/ yours fixups. So these > fixups were missed on merging. no, the problem turned out to be that i kept those fixes too spread out, and part of them went into the x86/for-akpm portion of the tree, part of it went into x86/testing. Since all x86 developers work against x86/testing this was never a problem - only now did it become one when i shuffled patches and branch boundaries around. Such problems will go away once linux-next starts using x86/testing as well. In any case i moved your fixes together and fixed up the patch ordering as well. Ingo