From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757405Ab3APRIx (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Jan 2013 12:08:53 -0500 Received: from avon.wwwdotorg.org ([70.85.31.133]:43478 "EHLO avon.wwwdotorg.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755595Ab3APRIt (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Jan 2013 12:08:49 -0500 Message-ID: <50F6DE9D.5080906@wwwdotorg.org> Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 10:08:45 -0700 From: Stephen Warren User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/17.0 Thunderbird/17.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Olof Johansson CC: Tony Prisk , Stephen Warren , Stephen Rothwell , Colin Cross , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Arnd Bergmann , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the tegra tree with the arm-soc tree References: <20130116141411.8fadedee54ed35dc0eddd288@canb.auug.org.au> <1358308153.32106.8.camel@gitbox> <50F62D69.8080100@nvidia.com> <1358311923.537.3.camel@gitbox> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 01/16/2013 09:27 AM, Olof Johansson wrote: > Hi, > > On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 8:52 PM, Tony Prisk wrote: >> On Tue, 2013-01-15 at 21:32 -0700, Stephen Warren wrote: >>> On 01/15/2013 08:49 PM, Tony Prisk wrote: >>>> On Wed, 2013-01-16 at 14:14 +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: >>>>> Hi all, >>>>> >>>>> Today's linux-next merge of the tegra tree got a conflict in >>>>> drivers/clocksource/Makefile between commit ff7ec345f0ec ("timer: vt8500: >>>>> Move timer code to drivers/clocksource") from the arm-soc tree and commit >>>>> ac0fd9eca3ba ("ARM: tegra: move timer.c to drivers/clocksource/") from >>>>> the tegra tree. >>>>> >>>>> I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action >>>>> is required). >>>>> >>>> >>>> I don't know about everyone else, but I feel the preference should be to >>>> keep things alphabetized where possible to help avoid with merge >>>> conflicts later on. This is always a problem when we start tacking >>>> things on the end of lists. >>>> >>>> I realise this Kconfig is not alphabetized anyway, but it's never too >>>> early to start on the 'right' path. >>> >>> Sounds like a good idea, but the issue is: When to do the initial sort >>> so it doesn't conflict with all the adds in a kernel cycle... Post and >>> immediately commit a new patch near the end of the merge window? >> >> Given that the maintainer can quite safely do the patch (sorry >> maintainers), I don't see any reason why it couldn't be done at the >> point where they stop accepting patches for the merge-window. Once the >> patches are stopped, sort the list in one last patch. That only works well if the one maintainer is the only person taking patches for the drivers/clocksource tree. It might be true that the "one maintainer" here ends up being arm-soc in this kernel cycle though? >> It makes sense to get it done in this window if possible as the Kconfig >> will only get bigger as time goes on, making sorting it more time >> consuming. > > Actually, Russell wen through and reordered these not long ago, if I > remember correctly. The current ordering is the same as in the > structure definition, and should be kept that way. I think this is talking about Makefile entries rather than struct definitions?