Re: linux-next

Re: linux-next

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1799 bytes --]

Hi,

On Tue, 18 Feb 2014 12:46:13 -0800 Behan Webster <behanw@converseincode.com> wrote:
>
> I'm assuming this is the right way to ask about being added to 
> linux-next. If it isn't please point me in the right direction.

Correct, but usually you would cc any interested parties so that I can
get some feel for when this code might be merged into Linus' tree.

> The LLVMLinux project would like to participate in the linux-next tree 
> if possible. We have a branch in our kernel git tree now into which we 
> have put some of our patches. At the moment, the patches in next are 
> some of the most core changes which enable clang in Kbuild, but don't 
> get in the way of the use of gcc.We'll put more patches in the branch as 
> our other changes are accepted. We'd like more visibility of some of the 
> changes we'd like in order to enable clang, and a way to help make sure 
> that we aren't breaking anything in other people's work.
> 
> http://git.linuxfoundation.org/llvmlinux/kernel.git (for-next branch)

Normally you would cite the git:// URL ..

> Otherwise we're publishing all of our patches in the master branch of 
> this git tree.  Currently we're working on enabling clang support for 
> x86, arm, and arm64.
> 
> The LLVMLinux project is working on changes to the LLVM/clang toolchain 
> as well as to the linux kernel code in order to be able to compile the 
> kernel with clang.

I have no objection to this, but would like to see more of these patches
reviewed by (among others) the kbuild guys (cc'd).  I also could not find
some of these patches published on lkml (where I would expect to see
them).  And the top patch has a very uninformative commit message :-(

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: linux-next

[Behan Webster]

On 02/18/14 16:17, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, 18 Feb 2014 12:46:13 -0800 Behan Webster <behanw@converseincode.com> wrote:
>> I'm assuming this is the right way to ask about being added to
>> linux-next. If it isn't please point me in the right direction.
> Correct, but usually you would cc any interested parties so that I can
> get some feel for when this code might be merged into Linus' tree.
Understood.

Mostly gathering up what is necessary at this point.

We are indeed working on sending patches to the appropriate people.

>> The LLVMLinux project would like to participate in the linux-next tree
>> if possible. We have a branch in our kernel git tree now into which we
>> have put some of our patches. At the moment, the patches in next are
>> some of the most core changes which enable clang in Kbuild, but don't
>> get in the way of the use of gcc.We'll put more patches in the branch as
>> our other changes are accepted. We'd like more visibility of some of the
>> changes we'd like in order to enable clang, and a way to help make sure
>> that we aren't breaking anything in other people's work.
>>
>> http://git.linuxfoundation.org/llvmlinux/kernel.git (for-next branch)
> Normally you would cite the git:// URL ..
Doh. Yes. That would make sense too. A simple protocol change to the URL 
is all it takes. Both are available.

git://git.linuxfoundation.org/llvmlinux/kernel.git


>> Otherwise we're publishing all of our patches in the master branch of
>> this git tree.  Currently we're working on enabling clang support for
>> x86, arm, and arm64.
>>
>> The LLVMLinux project is working on changes to the LLVM/clang toolchain
>> as well as to the linux kernel code in order to be able to compile the
>> kernel with clang.
> I have no objection to this, but would like to see more of these patches
> reviewed by (among others) the kbuild guys (cc'd).  I also could not find
> some of these patches published on lkml (where I would expect to see
> them).  And the top patch has a very uninformative commit message :-(
Of course. That is the intention. I'll review all the commit messages as 
well.

Thanks for the info.

Behan

-- 
Behan Webster
behanw@converseincode.com

Re: linux-next

[Sam Ravnborg]

> >>The LLVMLinux project is working on changes to the LLVM/clang toolchain
> >>as well as to the linux kernel code in order to be able to compile the
> >>kernel with clang.
> >I have no objection to this, but would like to see more of these patches
> >reviewed by (among others) the kbuild guys (cc'd).  I also could not find
> >some of these patches published on lkml (where I would expect to see
> >them).  And the top patch has a very uninformative commit message :-(
> Of course. That is the intention. I'll review all the commit
> messages as well.

Please send the patches as least to linux-kbuild for review.
I almost never go hunting for patches in a git repo for review,
and this is the same for others.

	Sam

Re: linux-next

[Behan Webster]

On 02/18/14 22:07, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
>>>> The LLVMLinux project is working on changes to the LLVM/clang toolchain
>>>> as well as to the linux kernel code in order to be able to compile the
>>>> kernel with clang.
>>> I have no objection to this, but would like to see more of these patches
>>> reviewed by (among others) the kbuild guys (cc'd).  I also could not find
>>> some of these patches published on lkml (where I would expect to see
>>> them).  And the top patch has a very uninformative commit message :-(
>> Of course. That is the intention. I'll review all the commit
>> messages as well.
> Please send the patches as least to linux-kbuild for review.
> I almost never go hunting for patches in a git repo for review,
> and this is the same for others.
Yes. The plan is to send them to the list. Just haven't got to it yet. 
Sorry for the confusion.

Like I said, at this point I was just asking about linux-next inclusion, 
and how that all worked.

Behan

-- 
Behan Webster
behanw@converseincode.com

Re: linux-next

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 547 bytes --]

Hi,

On Tue, 18 Feb 2014 22:12:05 -0800 Behan Webster <behanw@converseincode.com> wrote:
>
> Yes. The plan is to send them to the list. Just haven't got to it yet. 
> Sorry for the confusion.
> 
> Like I said, at this point I was just asking about linux-next inclusion, 
> and how that all worked.

OK, I should have said that linux-next is for patches that have passed
review and unit testing and are essentially ready to go to Linus (or your
upstream tree).

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: linux-next

[Behan Webster]

On 02/18/14 22:22, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, 18 Feb 2014 22:12:05 -0800 Behan Webster <behanw@converseincode.com> wrote:
>> Yes. The plan is to send them to the list. Just haven't got to it yet.
>> Sorry for the confusion.
>>
>> Like I said, at this point I was just asking about linux-next inclusion,
>> and how that all worked.
> OK, I should have said that linux-next is for patches that have passed
> review and unit testing and are essentially ready to go to Linus (or your
> upstream tree).
Then we're down to just the thinkpad ACPI nested functions patch which 
fits those criteria.

I will remove the other patches (since they haven't been reviewed by the 
appropriate kernel community yet), and we will only add patches to that 
branch that satisfy those rules.

Thanks,

Behan

-- 
Behan Webster
behanw@converseincode.com

Re: linux-next

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2159 bytes --]

Hi Behan,

On Wed, 19 Feb 2014 10:06:05 -0800 Behan Webster <behanw@converseincode.com> wrote:
>
> Then we're down to just the thinkpad ACPI nested functions patch which 
> fits those criteria.
> 
> I will remove the other patches (since they haven't been reviewed by the 
> appropriate kernel community yet), and we will only add patches to that 
> branch that satisfy those rules.

OK, added form today with just you as contact (I can add other contacts
if that make sense - these are people/lists that will be notified of
conflicts and errors associated with your tree).  I called the tree "clang".

Thanks for adding your subsystem tree as a participant of linux-next.  As
you may know, this is not a judgment of your code.  The purpose of
linux-next is for integration testing and to lower the impact of
conflicts between subsystems in the next merge window. 

You will need to ensure that the patches/commits in your tree/series have
been:
     * submitted under GPL v2 (or later) and include the Contributor's
	Signed-off-by,
     * posted to the relevant mailing list,
     * reviewed by you (or another maintainer of your subsystem tree),
     * successfully unit tested, and 
     * destined for the current or next Linux merge window.

Basically, this should be just what you would send to Linus (or ask him
to fetch).  It is allowed to be rebased if you deem it necessary.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell 
sfr@canb.auug.org.au

Legal Stuff:
By participating in linux-next, your subsystem tree contributions are
public and will be included in the linux-next trees.  You may be sent
e-mail messages indicating errors or other issues when the
patches/commits from your subsystem tree are merged and tested in
linux-next.  These messages may also be cross-posted to the linux-next
mailing list, the linux-kernel mailing list, etc.  The linux-next tree
project and IBM (my employer) make no warranties regarding the linux-next
project, the testing procedures, the results, the e-mails, etc.  If you
don't agree to these ground rules, let me know and I'll remove your tree
from participation in linux-next.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]