<div dir="ltr">Heh, I made the same mistake, I did remember that you sent some e-mail that there was v2 on the ML.<div><br></div><div>So to be sure I've cherry-picked this one from your branch instead of cherry-picking from patchwork which already had your change included 2 more times in various pull requests from Khem:</div><div><a href="https://patchwork.openembedded.org/project/oe-core/patches/?submitter=&state=&q=LPAE&archive=&delegate=">https://patchwork.openembedded.org/project/oe-core/patches/?submitter=&state=&q=LPAE&archive=&delegate=</a></div><div><br></div><div>so instead of checking which version was the correct one, I've cherry-picked it from your branch.. </div><div><br></div><div>.. and only after the patchtest complained again, I've read the 2nd half of your message saying that your morty branch has v1 :).<br><div><div><br></div><div>Fixed in my branches:</div><div><br></div><div><div>To git+ssh://<a href="http://git.openembedded.org/openembedded-core-contrib">git.openembedded.org/openembedded-core-contrib</a></div><div> + 67f3094d7e...d4176ea2b1 jansa/morty -> jansa/morty (forced update)</div><div> + 16250e9dba...155936a8e5 jansa/morty-backports -> jansa/morty-backports (forced update)</div><div> + e619b8bef6...3367e9d602 jansa/pyro -> jansa/pyro (forced update)</div><div> + e48f581764...8283b4ee52 jansa/pyro-backports -> jansa/pyro-backports (forced update)</div><div> + a6bd32a657...5530f852e9 jansa/rocko -> jansa/rocko (forced update)</div><div> + 0aae0b0579...56b25745e3 jansa/rocko-backports -> jansa/rocko-backports (forced update)</div></div><div><br></div></div></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sat, Mar 10, 2018 at 4:30 AM, Andre McCurdy <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:armccurdy@gmail.com" target="_blank">armccurdy@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span class="">On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 4:00 PM, Patchwork<br>
<<a href="mailto:patchwork@patchwork.openembedded.org">patchwork@patchwork.<wbr>openembedded.org</a>> wrote:<br>
> == Series Details ==<br>
><br>
> Series: gcc6: Upgrade to 6.4.0 (latest stable series release) (rev3)<br>
> Revision: 3<br>
> URL : <a href="https://patchwork.openembedded.org/series/11226/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://patchwork.<wbr>openembedded.org/series/11226/</a><br>
> State : failure<br>
><br>
> == Summary ==<br>
><br>
> Thank you for submitting this patch series to OpenEmbedded Core. This is<br>
> an automated response. Several tests have been executed on the proposed<br>
> series by patchtest resulting in the following failures:<br>
><br>
> * Issue Upstream-Status is in incorrect format [test_upstream_status_<wbr>presence_format]<br>
> Suggested fix Fix Upstream-Status format in 0001-enable-FL_LPAE-flag-for-<wbr>armv7ve-cores.patch<br>
> Current UpStream-Status: Backport<br>
> Standard format Upstream-Status: <Valid status><br>
> Valid status Pending, Accepted, Backport, Denied, Inappropriate [reason], Submitted [where]<br>
<br>
</span>The v2 patch was sent to the list here:<br>
<br>
<a href="http://lists.openembedded.org/pipermail/openembedded-core/2017-November/144159.html" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.openembedded.org/<wbr>pipermail/openembedded-core/<wbr>2017-November/144159.html</a><br>
<br>
but it seems my morty branch still has the v1 patch with the typo...<br>
<div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5">--<br>
______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
Openembedded-core mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org">Openembedded-core@lists.<wbr>openembedded.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.openembedded.org/<wbr>mailman/listinfo/openembedded-<wbr>core</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>