From: Tony Prisk <linux@prisktech.co.nz>
To: Stephen Warren <swarren@nvidia.com>
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
Colin Cross <ccross@android.com>, Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net>,
linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the tegra tree with the arm-soc tree
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 17:52:03 +1300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1358311923.537.3.camel@gitbox> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <50F62D69.8080100@nvidia.com>
On Tue, 2013-01-15 at 21:32 -0700, Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 01/15/2013 08:49 PM, Tony Prisk wrote:
> > On Wed, 2013-01-16 at 14:14 +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> Today's linux-next merge of the tegra tree got a conflict in
> >> drivers/clocksource/Makefile between commit ff7ec345f0ec ("timer: vt8500:
> >> Move timer code to drivers/clocksource") from the arm-soc tree and commit
> >> ac0fd9eca3ba ("ARM: tegra: move timer.c to drivers/clocksource/") from
> >> the tegra tree.
> >>
> >> I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action
> >> is required).
> >>
> >
> > I don't know about everyone else, but I feel the preference should be to
> > keep things alphabetized where possible to help avoid with merge
> > conflicts later on. This is always a problem when we start tacking
> > things on the end of lists.
> >
> > I realise this Kconfig is not alphabetized anyway, but it's never too
> > early to start on the 'right' path.
>
> Sounds like a good idea, but the issue is: When to do the initial sort
> so it doesn't conflict with all the adds in a kernel cycle... Post and
> immediately commit a new patch near the end of the merge window?
Given that the maintainer can quite safely do the patch (sorry
maintainers), I don't see any reason why it couldn't be done at the
point where they stop accepting patches for the merge-window. Once the
patches are stopped, sort the list in one last patch.
It makes sense to get it done in this window if possible as the Kconfig
will only get bigger as time goes on, making sorting it more time
consuming.
Regards
Tony P
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: linux@prisktech.co.nz (Tony Prisk)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the tegra tree with the arm-soc tree
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 17:52:03 +1300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1358311923.537.3.camel@gitbox> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <50F62D69.8080100@nvidia.com>
On Tue, 2013-01-15 at 21:32 -0700, Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 01/15/2013 08:49 PM, Tony Prisk wrote:
> > On Wed, 2013-01-16 at 14:14 +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> Today's linux-next merge of the tegra tree got a conflict in
> >> drivers/clocksource/Makefile between commit ff7ec345f0ec ("timer: vt8500:
> >> Move timer code to drivers/clocksource") from the arm-soc tree and commit
> >> ac0fd9eca3ba ("ARM: tegra: move timer.c to drivers/clocksource/") from
> >> the tegra tree.
> >>
> >> I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action
> >> is required).
> >>
> >
> > I don't know about everyone else, but I feel the preference should be to
> > keep things alphabetized where possible to help avoid with merge
> > conflicts later on. This is always a problem when we start tacking
> > things on the end of lists.
> >
> > I realise this Kconfig is not alphabetized anyway, but it's never too
> > early to start on the 'right' path.
>
> Sounds like a good idea, but the issue is: When to do the initial sort
> so it doesn't conflict with all the adds in a kernel cycle... Post and
> immediately commit a new patch near the end of the merge window?
Given that the maintainer can quite safely do the patch (sorry
maintainers), I don't see any reason why it couldn't be done at the
point where they stop accepting patches for the merge-window. Once the
patches are stopped, sort the list in one last patch.
It makes sense to get it done in this window if possible as the Kconfig
will only get bigger as time goes on, making sorting it more time
consuming.
Regards
Tony P
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-01-16 4:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 48+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-01-16 3:14 linux-next: manual merge of the tegra tree with the arm-soc tree Stephen Rothwell
2013-01-16 3:14 ` Stephen Rothwell
2013-01-16 3:14 ` Stephen Rothwell
2013-01-16 3:49 ` Tony Prisk
2013-01-16 3:49 ` Tony Prisk
2013-01-16 4:32 ` Stephen Warren
2013-01-16 4:32 ` Stephen Warren
2013-01-16 4:52 ` Tony Prisk [this message]
2013-01-16 4:52 ` Tony Prisk
2013-01-16 16:27 ` Olof Johansson
2013-01-16 16:27 ` Olof Johansson
2013-01-16 17:08 ` Stephen Warren
2013-01-16 17:08 ` Stephen Warren
2013-01-16 17:35 ` Olof Johansson
2013-01-16 17:35 ` Olof Johansson
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2020-07-19 23:04 Stephen Rothwell
2020-07-19 23:04 ` Stephen Rothwell
2020-03-26 22:27 Stephen Rothwell
2020-03-26 22:27 ` Stephen Rothwell
2020-03-27 13:18 ` Thierry Reding
2020-03-27 13:18 ` Thierry Reding
2020-03-27 13:50 ` Arnd Bergmann
2020-03-27 13:50 ` Arnd Bergmann
2019-06-25 0:12 Stephen Rothwell
2019-06-25 0:12 ` Stephen Rothwell
2015-12-02 11:46 Mark Brown
2015-12-02 11:46 ` Mark Brown
2013-03-18 4:31 Stephen Rothwell
2013-03-18 4:31 ` Stephen Rothwell
2013-03-18 4:31 ` Stephen Rothwell
2013-03-18 15:23 ` Stephen Warren
2013-03-18 15:23 ` Stephen Warren
2013-03-18 15:49 ` Arnd Bergmann
2013-03-18 15:49 ` Arnd Bergmann
2013-02-02 11:52 Stephen Rothwell
2013-02-02 11:45 Stephen Rothwell
2013-01-23 5:30 Stephen Rothwell
2013-01-23 5:30 ` Stephen Rothwell
2013-01-23 5:30 ` Stephen Rothwell
2013-01-23 5:25 Stephen Rothwell
2013-01-23 5:25 ` Stephen Rothwell
2013-01-23 5:25 ` Stephen Rothwell
2013-01-16 3:10 Stephen Rothwell
2013-01-16 3:10 ` Stephen Rothwell
2013-01-16 3:10 ` Stephen Rothwell
2013-01-16 3:12 ` Stephen Rothwell
2013-01-16 3:12 ` Stephen Rothwell
2013-01-16 3:12 ` Stephen Rothwell
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=1358311923.537.3.camel@gitbox \
--to=linux@prisktech.co.nz \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=ccross@android.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-next@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=olof@lixom.net \
--cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
--cc=swarren@nvidia.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.