From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932219AbbDHR7K (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Apr 2015 13:59:10 -0400 Received: from wtarreau.pck.nerim.net ([62.212.114.60]:42101 "EHLO 1wt.eu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753482AbbDHR7H (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Apr 2015 13:59:07 -0400 Date: Wed, 8 Apr 2015 19:56:00 +0200 From: Willy Tarreau To: Dan Carpenter Cc: Sudip Mukherjee , devel@driverdev.osuosl.org, Rodolfo Giometti , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, Arnd Bergmann , Wolfram Sang , Takashi Iwai , Greg Kroah-Hartman , alsa-devel@alsa-project.org, "James E.J. Bottomley" , Jaroslav Kysela , Mark Brown , linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org, linux-spi@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, Jean Delvare Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/14] parport: return value of attach and parport_register_driver Message-ID: <20150408175600.GI18177@1wt.eu> References: <1428492040-5581-1-git-send-email-sudipm.mukherjee@gmail.com> <1428492040-5581-2-git-send-email-sudipm.mukherjee@gmail.com> <20150408113832.GH10964@mwanda> <20150408115010.GA11153@sudip-PC> <20150408122737.GK10964@mwanda> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150408122737.GK10964@mwanda> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Apr 08, 2015 at 03:27:37PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > On Wed, Apr 08, 2015 at 05:20:10PM +0530, Sudip Mukherjee wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 08, 2015 at 02:38:32PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > > > 1) We can't apply this patch on its own so this way of breaking up the > > > patches doesn't work. > > yes, if the first patch is reverted for any reason all the others need > > to be reverted also. so then everything in one single patch? > > The problem is that patch 1/1 breaks the build. The rule is that we > should be able to apply part of a patch series and nothing breaks. If > we apply the patch series out of order than things break that's our > problem, yes. But if we apply only 1/1 and it breaks, that's a problem > with the series. Yep, keep in mind that "git bisect" will randomly land in the middle of any set of patches during a debugging session and it could very well land on this one. If it breaks, that's a real pain for the people trying to bisect their bug because suddenly they have to deal with a second bug totally different from theirs. Regards, Willy