Re: linux-next: Tree for June 5

[Ingo Molnar]

* Mike Travis <travis@xxxxxxx> wrote:

> The patch ordering was incorrect as I removed the node_to_cpumask_map 
> before I replaced the MAX_NUMNODES, should have been the opposite.

It needed the combination 4 failures along the line: the debug check was 
not complete, the ordering was bad and thus the splitup was bad as well 
- and then one component went missing in linux-next and the combined 
effect created this bug that needed a bisection by Andrew and Vegard to 
figure out.

the moral: we now tightened the debug check, fixed the integration bug 
and tightened the checks we have for patch propagation. (Thomas just 
added the new tip-check-integration script to tip/tip that implements 
this)

	Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/