From: Brian Starkey <brian.starkey@arm•com>
To: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm•com>
Cc: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel•org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm•com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm•com>,
Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@linaro•org>,
linaro-kernel@lists•linaro.org, kvmarm@lists•cs.columbia.edu,
linux-next@vger•kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists•infradead.org,
kernel-build-reports@lists•linaro.org
Subject: Re: next-20160222 build: 5 failures 9 warnings (next-20160222)
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2016 12:07:31 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160222120730.GB5779@e106950-lin.cambridge.arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <56CAF868.5020406@arm.com>
On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 12:00:40PM +0000, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>On 22/02/16 11:52, Brian Starkey wrote:
>>> This will create a new conflict, but will make the resolution 100%
>>> clear.
>>
>> I applied this, but arm64 defconfig wouldn't build until I uncommented
>> the '#define kvm_call_hyp(...' line.
>>
>> Is that right?
>
>This patch is intended as a merge indication so that when you do the
>merge with the arm64 tree, it conflicts and you can resolve it by going
>the right thing (merging the non-comment version of this line).
Right, now I understand "make the resolution 100% clear" - I guess 100%
clear isn't clear enough for me :-(
I've not seen that used as notation before, thanks for explaining.
-Brian
>
>So yes, uncommenting it is the right thing to do.
>
>Thanks,
>
> M.
>--
>Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-02-22 12:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-02-22 8:36 next-20160222 build: 5 failures 9 warnings (next-20160222) Build bot for Mark Brown
2016-02-22 10:08 ` Mark Brown
2016-02-22 10:41 ` Marc Zyngier
2016-02-22 11:52 ` Brian Starkey
2016-02-22 12:00 ` Marc Zyngier
2016-02-22 12:07 ` Brian Starkey [this message]
2016-02-22 12:44 ` Marc Zyngier
2016-02-22 13:19 ` Stephen Rothwell
2016-02-24 3:28 ` Mark Brown
2016-02-24 3:48 ` Stephen Rothwell
2016-02-24 4:16 ` Mark Brown
2016-02-22 10:19 ` Mark Brown
2016-02-22 10:25 ` Mark Brown
2016-02-22 10:37 ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20160222120730.GB5779@e106950-lin.cambridge.arm.com \
--to=brian.starkey@arm$(echo .)com \
--cc=broonie@kernel$(echo .)org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm$(echo .)com \
--cc=christoffer.dall@linaro$(echo .)org \
--cc=kernel-build-reports@lists$(echo .)linaro.org \
--cc=kvmarm@lists$(echo .)cs.columbia.edu \
--cc=linaro-kernel@lists$(echo .)linaro.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists$(echo .)infradead.org \
--cc=linux-next@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
--cc=marc.zyngier@arm$(echo .)com \
--cc=will.deacon@arm$(echo .)com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox