From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
To: Michal Marek <mmarek@suse.cz>
Cc: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>,
linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
linux-arch@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the kbuild tree with Linus' tree
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2016 09:39:45 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160913093945.521a28b4@canb.auug.org.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <e1cd32fd-6db2-0dc7-43c4-f678582326ad@suse.cz>
Hi Michal,
On Mon, 12 Sep 2016 11:03:08 +0200 Michal Marek <mmarek@suse.cz> wrote:
>
> On 2016-09-12 04:53, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
> > Question, what is the best way to merge dependent patches? Considering
> > they will need a good amount of architecture testing, I think they will
> > have to go via arch trees. But it also does not make sense to merge these
> > kbuild changes upstream first, without having tested them.
>
> I think it makes sense to merge the kbuild changes via kbuild.git, even
> if they are unused and untested. Any follow-up fixes required to enable
> the first architecture can go through the respective architecture tree.
> Does that sound OK?
And if you guarantee not to rebase the kbuild tree (or at least the
subset containing these patches), then each of the architecture trees
can just merge your tree (or a tag?) and then implement any necessary
arch dependent changes. I fixes are necessary, they can also be merged
into the architecture trees.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-09-12 23:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-09-12 1:32 linux-next: manual merge of the kbuild tree with Linus' tree Stephen Rothwell
2016-09-12 2:53 ` Nicholas Piggin
2016-09-12 9:03 ` Michal Marek
2016-09-12 23:39 ` Stephen Rothwell [this message]
2016-09-13 4:02 ` Stephen Rothwell
2016-09-13 4:09 ` Nicholas Piggin
2016-09-13 7:48 ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-09-13 9:12 ` Nicholas Piggin
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2022-10-06 18:16 Stephen Rothwell
2022-05-27 0:08 Stephen Rothwell
2022-04-03 22:09 Stephen Rothwell
2021-04-26 23:02 Stephen Rothwell
2021-02-22 22:24 Stephen Rothwell
2020-06-04 22:59 Stephen Rothwell
2019-05-01 22:46 Stephen Rothwell
2017-05-02 22:14 Stephen Rothwell
2016-07-28 1:50 Stephen Rothwell
2015-07-02 0:30 Stephen Rothwell
2015-07-02 6:47 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-07-02 7:17 ` Michal Marek
2015-07-02 9:18 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-07-02 19:53 ` Michal Marek
2015-07-03 11:56 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
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=20160913093945.521a28b4@canb.auug.org.au \
--to=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-next@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mmarek@suse.cz \
--cc=npiggin@gmail.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).