All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com>
To: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>
Cc: Roger Quadros <rogerq@ti.com>,
	javier@dowhile0.org, fcooper@ti.com, nsekhar@ti.com,
	linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org,
	computersforpeace@gmail.com, dwmw2@infradead.org,
	ezequiel@vanguardiasur.com.ar, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 00/17] memory: omap-gpmc: mtd: nand: Support GPMC NAND on non-OMAP platforms
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2016 18:05:31 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160415180531.15d790d2@bbrezillon> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160415154139.GS5995@atomide.com>

Hi Tony,

On Fri, 15 Apr 2016 08:41:40 -0700
Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com> wrote:

> * Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com> [160415 04:52]:
> > Roger, Tony,
> > 
> > On Fri, 15 Apr 2016 13:54:34 +0300
> > Roger Quadros <rogerq@ti.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > On 15/04/16 13:09, Boris Brezillon wrote:
> > > > Hi Roger,
> > > > 
> > > > On Fri, 15 Apr 2016 12:34:04 +0300
> > > > Roger Quadros <rogerq@ti.com> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > >> Tony & Boris,
> > > >>
> > > >> On 14/04/16 00:25, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> > > >>> * Roger Quadros <rogerq@ti.com> [160407 03:10]:
> > > >>>> Hi,
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> As this series has cross dependency between omap and mtd subsystems,
> > > >>>> I'll set up a immutable branch which omap-soc and l2-mtd must
> > > >>>> merge in together to avoid any conflicts/breakage during integration.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Brian has acked all mtd patches. Tony needs to give his Ack for the
> > > >>>> gpmc driver part and then I can provide the immutable branch.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Looks good to me, please feel free to add:
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Acked-by: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > > >> I've added Tony and Rob's Acked-by tags and pushed the patches at the
> > > >> below PULL request.
> > > >>
> > > >> Please take this into omap-soc and l2-mtd trees. Thanks.
> > > > 
> > > > I Pulled this branch into nand/next and had to resolve a few conflicts
> > > > (as you may have noticed, a few other reworks in the NAND and MTD layer
> > > > have been merged in the meantime).
> > > 
> > > OK. I'm not sure how well this will play when this merges into liunx-next
> > > via the omap-soc tree.
> > > 
> > > Instead, can you please create a non-mutable nand/base for me (which could be
> > > today's nand/next) and I can base my branch on that and Tony can use my
> > > branch without causing any merge-conflict in linux-next?
> > 
> > I just created a branch called nand/for-gpmc-rework based on today's
> > nand/next, but I'm still unsure how to proceed once you've rebased your
> > work on this branch?
> > 
> > Tony will first have to pull my immutable branch, then pull yours, and
> > then I'll have to pull an immutable branch from the the omap-soc tree
> > to get your changes into my nand/next branch (in case other patches
> > modify the same files before I send my PR). Am I missing something?
> > If I'm not, then this option looks over-complicated to me.
> 
> Well why don't you merge it all via NAND then? I'm not seeing
> any merge conflicts with the arch/arm/mach-omap* code.

I'm perfectly fine with that. Actually, that's what I first did (see the
nand/next-with-gpmc-rework I asked Roger to validate).
Roger, since you don't have any dependencies on omap stuff added after
4.6-rc1, I could even rebase your patches on top of nand/next to avoid
this merge commit (and the associated conflict resolution).

> 
> > ITOH, if we decide to let your patches go through the nand or omap-soc
> > tree, only one immutable branch will be created, and either the nand or
> > omap-soc maintainer (depending on who takes the patches) will have to
> > pull it into its -next branch.
> > 
> > I'm quite new to all this merging process, so don't hesitate to correct
> > me if I'm wrong.
> 
> Well the rules are that if something agreed to be immutable, then
> it will never get redone. And the immutable branch should be based
> on the absolute minimal set of patches against some earlier tag,
> usually -rc1 is a good one. This avoids other tree to need to pull
> in a huge amount of changes from other trees just to avoid merge
> conflicts.

How would you do it in this particular case. Say I have to provide you
with an immutable branch, it should only contain Roger's patches, right?

But this also means this immutable branch has to be pulled into my
nand/next branch before all other changes touching the same set of
files, which in turn means that I'll have to rebase and push -f my
nand/next branch (which I'd like to avoid).
Or should I just pull this immutable branch in my current nand/next and
let you pull the same immutable branch in omap-soc. I mean, would this
prevent conflicts when our branches are merged into linux-next, no
matter the order.

-- 
Boris Brezillon, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
http://free-electrons.com

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon-wi1+55ScJUtKEb57/3fJTNBPR1lH4CV8@public.gmane.org>
To: Tony Lindgren <tony-4v6yS6AI5VpBDgjK7y7TUQ@public.gmane.org>
Cc: Roger Quadros <rogerq-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org>,
	javier-0uQlZySMnqxg9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org,
	fcooper-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org,
	nsekhar-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org,
	linux-mtd-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org,
	linux-omap-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
	computersforpeace-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org,
	dwmw2-wEGCiKHe2LqWVfeAwA7xHQ@public.gmane.org,
	ezequiel-30ULvvUtt6G51wMPkGsGjgyUoB5FGQPZ@public.gmane.org,
	devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
	linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 00/17] memory: omap-gpmc: mtd: nand: Support GPMC NAND on non-OMAP platforms
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2016 18:05:31 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160415180531.15d790d2@bbrezillon> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160415154139.GS5995-4v6yS6AI5VpBDgjK7y7TUQ@public.gmane.org>

Hi Tony,

On Fri, 15 Apr 2016 08:41:40 -0700
Tony Lindgren <tony-4v6yS6AI5VpBDgjK7y7TUQ@public.gmane.org> wrote:

> * Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon-wi1+55ScJUtKEb57/3fJTNBPR1lH4CV8@public.gmane.org> [160415 04:52]:
> > Roger, Tony,
> > 
> > On Fri, 15 Apr 2016 13:54:34 +0300
> > Roger Quadros <rogerq-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> > 
> > > On 15/04/16 13:09, Boris Brezillon wrote:
> > > > Hi Roger,
> > > > 
> > > > On Fri, 15 Apr 2016 12:34:04 +0300
> > > > Roger Quadros <rogerq-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > >> Tony & Boris,
> > > >>
> > > >> On 14/04/16 00:25, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> > > >>> * Roger Quadros <rogerq-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org> [160407 03:10]:
> > > >>>> Hi,
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> As this series has cross dependency between omap and mtd subsystems,
> > > >>>> I'll set up a immutable branch which omap-soc and l2-mtd must
> > > >>>> merge in together to avoid any conflicts/breakage during integration.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Brian has acked all mtd patches. Tony needs to give his Ack for the
> > > >>>> gpmc driver part and then I can provide the immutable branch.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Looks good to me, please feel free to add:
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Acked-by: Tony Lindgren <tony-4v6yS6AI5VpBDgjK7y7TUQ@public.gmane.org>
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > > >> I've added Tony and Rob's Acked-by tags and pushed the patches at the
> > > >> below PULL request.
> > > >>
> > > >> Please take this into omap-soc and l2-mtd trees. Thanks.
> > > > 
> > > > I Pulled this branch into nand/next and had to resolve a few conflicts
> > > > (as you may have noticed, a few other reworks in the NAND and MTD layer
> > > > have been merged in the meantime).
> > > 
> > > OK. I'm not sure how well this will play when this merges into liunx-next
> > > via the omap-soc tree.
> > > 
> > > Instead, can you please create a non-mutable nand/base for me (which could be
> > > today's nand/next) and I can base my branch on that and Tony can use my
> > > branch without causing any merge-conflict in linux-next?
> > 
> > I just created a branch called nand/for-gpmc-rework based on today's
> > nand/next, but I'm still unsure how to proceed once you've rebased your
> > work on this branch?
> > 
> > Tony will first have to pull my immutable branch, then pull yours, and
> > then I'll have to pull an immutable branch from the the omap-soc tree
> > to get your changes into my nand/next branch (in case other patches
> > modify the same files before I send my PR). Am I missing something?
> > If I'm not, then this option looks over-complicated to me.
> 
> Well why don't you merge it all via NAND then? I'm not seeing
> any merge conflicts with the arch/arm/mach-omap* code.

I'm perfectly fine with that. Actually, that's what I first did (see the
nand/next-with-gpmc-rework I asked Roger to validate).
Roger, since you don't have any dependencies on omap stuff added after
4.6-rc1, I could even rebase your patches on top of nand/next to avoid
this merge commit (and the associated conflict resolution).

> 
> > ITOH, if we decide to let your patches go through the nand or omap-soc
> > tree, only one immutable branch will be created, and either the nand or
> > omap-soc maintainer (depending on who takes the patches) will have to
> > pull it into its -next branch.
> > 
> > I'm quite new to all this merging process, so don't hesitate to correct
> > me if I'm wrong.
> 
> Well the rules are that if something agreed to be immutable, then
> it will never get redone. And the immutable branch should be based
> on the absolute minimal set of patches against some earlier tag,
> usually -rc1 is a good one. This avoids other tree to need to pull
> in a huge amount of changes from other trees just to avoid merge
> conflicts.

How would you do it in this particular case. Say I have to provide you
with an immutable branch, it should only contain Roger's patches, right?

But this also means this immutable branch has to be pulled into my
nand/next branch before all other changes touching the same set of
files, which in turn means that I'll have to rebase and push -f my
nand/next branch (which I'd like to avoid).
Or should I just pull this immutable branch in my current nand/next and
let you pull the same immutable branch in omap-soc. I mean, would this
prevent conflicts when our branches are merged into linux-next, no
matter the order.

-- 
Boris Brezillon, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
http://free-electrons.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

  reply	other threads:[~2016-04-15 16:05 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 93+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-04-07 10:08 [PATCH v6 00/17] memory: omap-gpmc: mtd: nand: Support GPMC NAND on non-OMAP platforms Roger Quadros
2016-04-07 10:08 ` Roger Quadros
2016-04-07 10:08 ` [PATCH v6 01/17] ARM: OMAP2+: gpmc: Add platform data Roger Quadros
2016-04-07 10:08   ` Roger Quadros
2016-04-07 10:08 ` [PATCH v6 02/17] ARM: OMAP2+: gpmc: Add gpmc timings and settings to " Roger Quadros
2016-04-07 10:08   ` Roger Quadros
2016-04-07 10:08 ` [PATCH v6 03/17] memory: omap-gpmc: Introduce GPMC to NAND interface Roger Quadros
2016-04-07 10:08   ` Roger Quadros
2016-04-07 10:08 ` [PATCH v6 04/17] memory: omap-gpmc: Add GPMC-NAND ops to get writebufferempty status Roger Quadros
2016-04-07 10:08   ` Roger Quadros
2016-04-07 10:08 ` [PATCH v6 05/17] memory: omap-gpmc: Implement IRQ domain for NAND IRQs Roger Quadros
2016-04-07 10:08   ` Roger Quadros
2016-04-11 14:52   ` Rob Herring
2016-04-11 14:52     ` Rob Herring
2016-04-07 10:08 ` [PATCH v6 06/17] mtd: nand: omap: Use gpmc_omap_get_nand_ops() to get NAND registers Roger Quadros
2016-04-07 10:08   ` Roger Quadros
2016-04-07 10:08 ` [PATCH v6 07/17] mtd: nand: omap: Switch to using GPMC-NAND ops for writebuffer empty check Roger Quadros
2016-04-07 10:08   ` Roger Quadros
2016-04-07 10:08 ` [PATCH v6 08/17] mtd: nand: omap: Copy platform data parameters to omap_nand_info data Roger Quadros
2016-04-07 10:08   ` Roger Quadros
2016-04-07 10:08 ` [PATCH v6 09/17] mtd: nand: omap: Clean up device tree support Roger Quadros
2016-04-07 10:08   ` Roger Quadros
2016-04-07 10:08 ` [PATCH v6 10/17] mtd: nand: omap: Update DT binding documentation Roger Quadros
2016-04-07 10:08   ` Roger Quadros
2016-04-07 10:08 ` [PATCH v6 11/17] memory: omap-gpmc: Prevent mapping into 1st 16MB Roger Quadros
2016-04-07 10:08   ` Roger Quadros
2016-04-07 10:08 ` [PATCH v6 12/17] memory: omap-gpmc: Move device tree binding to correct location Roger Quadros
2016-04-07 10:08   ` Roger Quadros
2016-04-07 10:08 ` [PATCH v6 13/17] memory: omap-gpmc: Support general purpose input for WAITPINs Roger Quadros
2016-04-07 10:08   ` Roger Quadros
2016-04-11 15:00   ` Rob Herring
2016-04-11 15:00     ` Rob Herring
2016-04-07 10:08 ` [PATCH v6 14/17] memory: omap-gpmc: Reserve WAITPIN if needed for WAIT monitoring Roger Quadros
2016-04-07 10:08   ` Roger Quadros
2016-04-07 10:08 ` [PATCH v6 15/17] memory: omap-gpmc: Support WAIT pin edge interrupts Roger Quadros
2016-04-07 10:08   ` Roger Quadros
2016-04-11 15:03   ` Rob Herring
2016-04-11 15:03     ` Rob Herring
2016-04-07 10:08 ` [PATCH v6 16/17] memory: omap-gpmc: Prevent GPMC_STATUS from being accessed via gpmc_regs Roger Quadros
2016-04-07 10:08   ` Roger Quadros
2016-04-07 10:08 ` [PATCH v6 17/17] mtd: nand: omap2: Implement NAND ready using gpiolib Roger Quadros
2016-04-07 10:08   ` Roger Quadros
2016-04-11 15:04   ` Rob Herring
2016-04-11 15:04     ` Rob Herring
2016-04-13 21:25 ` [PATCH v6 00/17] memory: omap-gpmc: mtd: nand: Support GPMC NAND on non-OMAP platforms Tony Lindgren
2016-04-13 21:25   ` Tony Lindgren
2016-04-15  9:34   ` Roger Quadros
2016-04-15  9:34     ` Roger Quadros
2016-04-15 10:09     ` Boris Brezillon
2016-04-15 10:09       ` Boris Brezillon
2016-04-15 10:54       ` Roger Quadros
2016-04-15 10:54         ` Roger Quadros
2016-04-15 11:12         ` Boris Brezillon
2016-04-15 11:12           ` Boris Brezillon
2016-04-15 11:51         ` Boris Brezillon
2016-04-15 11:51           ` Boris Brezillon
2016-04-15 15:41           ` Tony Lindgren
2016-04-15 15:41             ` Tony Lindgren
2016-04-15 16:05             ` Boris Brezillon [this message]
2016-04-15 16:05               ` Boris Brezillon
2016-04-15 16:19               ` Tony Lindgren
2016-04-15 16:19                 ` Tony Lindgren
2016-04-16  8:57                 ` Boris Brezillon
2016-04-18 12:31                   ` Roger Quadros
2016-04-18 12:31                     ` Roger Quadros
2016-04-18 12:52                     ` Roger Quadros
2016-04-18 12:52                       ` Roger Quadros
2016-04-18 13:13                       ` Boris Brezillon
2016-04-18 13:13                         ` Boris Brezillon
2016-04-18 13:48                         ` Roger Quadros
2016-04-18 13:48                           ` Roger Quadros
2016-04-18 14:10                           ` Boris Brezillon
2016-04-18 14:10                             ` Boris Brezillon
2016-04-18 14:39                             ` Roger Quadros
2016-04-18 14:39                               ` Roger Quadros
2016-04-18 14:57                               ` Boris Brezillon
2016-04-18 14:57                                 ` Boris Brezillon
2016-04-19 12:46                                 ` Roger Quadros
2016-04-19 12:46                                   ` Roger Quadros
2016-04-19 12:50                                   ` Boris Brezillon
2016-04-19 12:50                                     ` Boris Brezillon
2016-04-19 20:11                                   ` Boris Brezillon
2016-04-19 20:11                                     ` Boris Brezillon
2016-04-20  8:58                                     ` Roger Quadros
2016-04-20  8:58                                       ` Roger Quadros
2016-04-20 14:45                                     ` Tony Lindgren
2016-04-20 14:45                                       ` Tony Lindgren
2016-04-19 13:22                               ` Boris Brezillon
2016-04-19 13:22                                 ` Boris Brezillon
2016-04-19 14:26                                 ` Roger Quadros
2016-04-19 14:26                                   ` Roger Quadros
2016-04-19 14:49                                   ` Roger Quadros
2016-04-19 14:49                                     ` Roger Quadros

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=20160415180531.15d790d2@bbrezillon \
    --to=boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com \
    --cc=computersforpeace@gmail.com \
    --cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
    --cc=ezequiel@vanguardiasur.com.ar \
    --cc=fcooper@ti.com \
    --cc=javier@dowhile0.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-omap@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=nsekhar@ti.com \
    --cc=rogerq@ti.com \
    --cc=tony@atomide.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.