From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC67AC433E0 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2021 02:13:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8786A22D73 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2021 02:13:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727081AbhAYCIE (ORCPT ); Sun, 24 Jan 2021 21:08:04 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:54926 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727075AbhAYCHG (ORCPT ); Sun, 24 Jan 2021 21:07:06 -0500 Received: from mail-pj1-x102b.google.com (mail-pj1-x102b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::102b]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 20280C061573; Sun, 24 Jan 2021 18:06:18 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-pj1-x102b.google.com with SMTP id cq1so7396241pjb.4; Sun, 24 Jan 2021 18:06:18 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=dJotwfyRiNvMA2JUWu/JdXPCefXCZhv30V+8f8cWdbc=; b=JZVXM3B0nywR9s6BtSUdcVekC9BKl92Ivhxa6IwhBdJRMuNjbijJUt6V2KjrKzJ0/E bgTk5GB0lwIsNPeRbSqZuc9xanAzEzB+bqlsvsGwYygx/wVh4ntqeOX+u2u4yZcIaYdd sqC1QgJ8BuGD5mjVTylvLzyKD7QYkxmNe+K8wwWJr4abG9Javr09s/Cd71yPNN75uVKT oJbxQf1T3/oDNT5+m0U90nzhVgy2KWg8P292uiXsd9SSB53XxDlSPGRZQyprVs/K48SM ViqTuYEk/+qLU/+g5chYYamO84wKVIBEJLrGHqZChQGHgQJgib+loWHcLH+CtacCIBrW WGRg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=dJotwfyRiNvMA2JUWu/JdXPCefXCZhv30V+8f8cWdbc=; b=RjQHAT1Vd+0m5ftE95n7oIysJpX/KQqq0N3my7FNElLPd/DGp9cGqZkt1XQ43L1OaG 3kxMI2xSrK0i1eShR1uU9QSAf6waWINkyifxJ3nIfEi3dKQwUdAi5ReXc/IMABeTBBSI S9uFkPCoqfK1V9iAydKd7P6jrqbBYi2ROXpGc9U0NTyb/sbT01NTAxoqP5eM1ddUdXQY L/OqB2RwNnVfb398g5Vah/nAU08BuULb7LJtzYnfwa5p1oJFDJ4V0EenCpDxMJjuOwOH wTZRR1Be7WgCzmBmNEqRO59THcYRyauxMdqnWPFtg7FR6JP/4kjowpP4DNFo6Muo8cog ilmQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531qAzzDWHaYK78zKbr5KLr+3jbYCOssEPN06NoDCFctk42hfftj XYDjf9mKiDAwleQY75F95OIt+Af6JpE= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJytq+LS4ij4D7XRl5F7Ax/WUiGR4m6QVCZjCrYHJIIfoULzrZLDv3NMSlEGS7/n+eQ/rhnVGw== X-Received: by 2002:a17:90b:2286:: with SMTP id kx6mr6555938pjb.92.1611540377603; Sun, 24 Jan 2021 18:06:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (g54.222-224-210.ppp.wakwak.ne.jp. [222.224.210.54]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id b206sm14417100pfb.73.2021.01.24.18.06.16 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Sun, 24 Jan 2021 18:06:16 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2021 11:06:13 +0900 From: Stafford Horne To: Stephen Rothwell Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linux Next Mailing List Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the openrisc tree with Linus' tree Message-ID: <20210125020613.GT2002709@lianli.shorne-pla.net> References: <20210125090506.35337fa2@canb.auug.org.au> <20210125010446.GS2002709@lianli.shorne-pla.net> <20210125124746.40e2638d@canb.auug.org.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20210125124746.40e2638d@canb.auug.org.au> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-next@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jan 25, 2021 at 12:47:46PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi Stafford, > > On Mon, 25 Jan 2021 10:04:46 +0900 Stafford Horne wrote: > > > > Thank's I knew about this conflict but I was not sure the best way to handle, I > > was/am going to rebase the openrisc/for-next branch onto 5.11-rc5 once released. > > I will resolve the conflict during the rebase so you should be able to drop the > > conflict patch after that. > > Its a pretty trivial conflict, so I wouldn't do the rebase just for this. Alright, I will not rebase. > > The issue is I had a fix that went straight to 5.11. Should I usually put these > > kind of fixes on my for-next and my fixes branches in parallel, that way I can > > resolve conflicts on for-next before hand? > > I notice that the version in Linus' tree was merged from a separate > branch. The easiest that to do is for you to merge that same branch > into your for-next branch - that way you only get your own changes, not > any other stuff that might be in Linus' tree. > > > I don't usually do that as in my mind for next is for 5.12 and fixes for 5.11 go > > straight to 5.11. Also, I don't like putting the same patch in 2 queues. But > > if I got any advice on how to avoid this in the future it would be appreciated. > > Like I said, just merge your fixes branch into you for-next branch > when/if you think the fixes are important for further development, or > the conflicts become to great. That sounds like a good idea. Let me do that. > I can also add you fixes branch to linux-next if you like (I already > have 86 other "fixes" branches). I think that should be alright for now, I'll maintain merging the fixes branch myself when I think it's needed. Thank you, -Stafford