Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752717AbYKPMAZ (ORCPT ); Sun, 16 Nov 2008 07:00:25 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751819AbYKPMAG (ORCPT ); Sun, 16 Nov 2008 07:00:06 -0500 Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([140.211.166.183]:56401 "EHLO smtp.gentoo.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751770AbYKPMAE (ORCPT ); Sun, 16 Nov 2008 07:00:04 -0500 Message-ID: <49200B3C.7020203@gentoo.org> Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2008 12:59:56 +0100 From: =?UTF-8?B?UmHDumwgUG9yY2Vs?= User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (X11/20080914) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Adrian Bunk CC: Arjan van de Ven , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org, Ivan Kokshaysky , klausman@gentoo.org, Jesse Barnes , Andrew Morton , rth@twiddle.net Subject: Re: [ALPHA] 2.6.28-rc fails to compile References: <49083361.5060907@gentoo.org> <20081029100356.GA28224@cs181140183.pp.htv.fi> <20081029062741.7400e330@infradead.org> <20081029134553.GA9108@cs181140183.pp.htv.fi> <20081029065935.7a5930f9@infradead.org> <20081029141909.GC9108@cs181140183.pp.htv.fi> In-Reply-To: <20081029141909.GC9108@cs181140183.pp.htv.fi> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1450 Lines: 39 Adrian Bunk wrote: > On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 06:59:35AM -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote: >> On Wed, 29 Oct 2008 15:45:53 +0200 >> Adrian Bunk wrote: >> >>> On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 06:27:41AM -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote: >>>> Andrew has a patch for this in his tree for a while... I was >>>> assuming he'd do a patchdump to Linus late in -rc1 but it seems not >>>> to have happened.. >>> The basic problem for the Alpha build errors are circular #include's >>> (that are anyway a pretty bad thing), and I'm currently attacking >>> that problem (it seems to be surprisingly easy). >>> >>> That's IMHO better than the patch in -mm that uninlines >>> pci_ioremap_bar(). >> and in my opinion the uninline is nicer ;) >> Because that means we can add more checks to it over time without >> bloating the kernel. > > My usage of the word "better" was wrong. > > For fixing the compile error I do consider the patch I'm currently > testing as better, since this could otherwise beat us again in the > future. > > But the patches are completely orthogonal, and there's no reason against > including both. > > cu > Adrian > Any news? Something i could test? rc5 still fails, just FYI :) -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/