From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752752AbaCJRxP (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Mar 2014 13:53:15 -0400 Received: from shadbolt.e.decadent.org.uk ([88.96.1.126]:54428 "EHLO shadbolt.e.decadent.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750890AbaCJRxO (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Mar 2014 13:53:14 -0400 Message-ID: <1394473962.23624.3.camel@deadeye.wl.decadent.org.uk> Subject: Re: [PATCH RT 2/5] a few open coded completions From: Ben Hutchings To: Steven Rostedt Cc: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-rt-users , Thomas Gleixner , Carsten Emde , John Kacur , Corey Minyard Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2014 17:52:42 +0000 In-Reply-To: <20140310102928.7b2a2cfa@gandalf.local.home> References: <20131211003732.351606520@goodmis.org> <20131211003801.836995968@goodmis.org> <20131211144946.27d82a78@gandalf.local.home> <1394324841.2861.56.camel@deadeye.wl.decadent.org.uk> <20140310102928.7b2a2cfa@gandalf.local.home> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-1h6ZUk1d3cpPangUhxpF" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.8.5-2+b3 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 192.168.4.245 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: ben@decadent.org.uk X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on shadbolt.decadent.org.uk); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --=-1h6ZUk1d3cpPangUhxpF Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, 2014-03-10 at 10:29 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 00:27:21 +0000 > Ben Hutchings wrote: >=20 > > On Wed, 2013-12-11 at 14:49 -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > > Here's the new patch: > >=20 > > Doesn't add #includes and doesn't change any types, so of course it > > doesn't compile. WTF? > >=20 >=20 > Hi Ben, >=20 > This is an old thread. Which kernel did you apply it to. Before I send > any patch set out, I run a small test (heavy stress test, and also > compile several different configs). This patch was against 3.10-rt, and > may have already had the includes needed. I know the original patch > compiled, but I may not have tested the second patch. >=20 > Do you need this patch? Or did I miss something for 3.2-rt? You applied it to 3.2-rt: commit 916c8d2de3c4759f57426fa3cfee63b491e88939 Author: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior Date: Mon Oct 28 11:50:06 2013 +0100 swait: Add a few more users and 3.4-rt, 3.8-rt, 3.10-rt. So far as I can see, it is broken on all of those branches, though I only actually tried building 3.2-rt. Ben. --=20 Ben Hutchings Computers are not intelligent. They only think they are. --=-1h6ZUk1d3cpPangUhxpF Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iQIVAwUAUx376ue/yOyVhhEJAQqFcBAAnqnLfR5cutQZljTOhLBwE8oR2/GW3BX/ jtHRqBB44MyVLSfLu2Gg5Samk5fIeGn06L4lvXJFoygpa3SFtBPIZn5RkmD8Q5O5 TO59EAsAfzSe94DLdVM6QIVMsMRHJi3axiTI7Kl6KaLK8cSzBUQRwrKK1IhcRTLl IiSWm6tpAEbSnq4dseRVgmvsv9jmpPfs25gHahRBqjjAUZvLZqpOk9ozPyiFXIea g7tawveEe+VtXO2uRdKnYyFxFNgcmsLgMBNhdLrqeT61IPCrg80oT/opa2jv3oyL 2asqbu7oLjWfzRvHZTRwCsZQUjLAWkTEnP/0mxpX+wXn5RtTN1XDZ8a2zA07hfUg B9E9Ep0YqxTjm7bbcJRKKdww3QVNHA//rYs9vAFy4fR7Rvrb6KmyDhtvCin2xfSA UpdyqzzWRLu0QPVKjnz+BEaAL+Gi/kY7HJqEJSklKvLKHZoL8+dxw7AoTcPs+ACd 2on+Wg3q4snnBIrom/2Y8uwH0dA/bzXSuHqIqaiX6mAy0Q6qrCmbWTI+Rb5xhdyr 0I5IrBuLFjH9plRq1WMGIC2zIepR9dG1zeXMICrQp2O9ebd8xg+FDdMCW40/x3KF 9Sb0c2VT8lRA1nA+mSUKCcWy7RQqHYVYX3n7UPIktVqhetZjPQnmgRufNAzX12Vk eEOMngpIerc= =JJ+I -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-1h6ZUk1d3cpPangUhxpF--