* linux-next: duplicate patches in the kspp and kbuild trees
@ 2016-06-13 23:40 Stephen Rothwell
2016-06-13 23:53 ` Kees Cook
0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2016-06-13 23:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Kees Cook, Michal Marek; +Cc: linux-next, linux-kernel, Emese Revfy
Hi Kees,
As of today, there are four duplicate patches (different commits)
in the kspp and kbuild trees.
Shared library support
GCC plugin infrastructure
Add Cyclomatic complexity GCC plugin
Add sancov plugin
are in both trees as different commits :-( They have been in the kbuild
tree for a couple of days already. One of you should be merging the
other's branch, or you both should be mergeing a common branch.
Also, Kees, the versions in your tree do not have your Signed-off-by
(but do have Michal's).
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: linux-next: duplicate patches in the kspp and kbuild trees
2016-06-13 23:40 linux-next: duplicate patches in the kspp and kbuild trees Stephen Rothwell
@ 2016-06-13 23:53 ` Kees Cook
2016-06-13 23:57 ` Kees Cook
0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Kees Cook @ 2016-06-13 23:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stephen Rothwell; +Cc: Michal Marek, Linux-Next, LKML, Emese Revfy
On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 4:40 PM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> Hi Kees,
>
> As of today, there are four duplicate patches (different commits)
> in the kspp and kbuild trees.
>
> Shared library support
> GCC plugin infrastructure
> Add Cyclomatic complexity GCC plugin
> Add sancov plugin
>
> are in both trees as different commits :-( They have been in the kbuild
> tree for a couple of days already. One of you should be merging the
> other's branch, or you both should be mergeing a common branch.
>
> Also, Kees, the versions in your tree do not have your Signed-off-by
> (but do have Michal's).
Strange, I pulled these directly from linux-next. Michal had an
auto-responder saying he was going to be out-of-office, so I wanted to
make sure the !COMPILE_TEST fix got in.
Sounds like I should merge the kbuild tree, rather than cherry-picking
from linux-next? I will adjust.
Sorry for the confusion!
-Kees
--
Kees Cook
Chrome OS & Brillo Security
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: linux-next: duplicate patches in the kspp and kbuild trees
2016-06-13 23:53 ` Kees Cook
@ 2016-06-13 23:57 ` Kees Cook
2016-06-14 4:32 ` Stephen Rothwell
0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Kees Cook @ 2016-06-13 23:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stephen Rothwell; +Cc: Michal Marek, Linux-Next, LKML, Emese Revfy
On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 4:53 PM, Kees Cook <keescook@google.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 4:40 PM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>> Hi Kees,
>>
>> As of today, there are four duplicate patches (different commits)
>> in the kspp and kbuild trees.
>>
>> Shared library support
>> GCC plugin infrastructure
>> Add Cyclomatic complexity GCC plugin
>> Add sancov plugin
>>
>> are in both trees as different commits :-( They have been in the kbuild
>> tree for a couple of days already. One of you should be merging the
>> other's branch, or you both should be mergeing a common branch.
>>
>> Also, Kees, the versions in your tree do not have your Signed-off-by
>> (but do have Michal's).
>
> Strange, I pulled these directly from linux-next. Michal had an
> auto-responder saying he was going to be out-of-office, so I wanted to
> make sure the !COMPILE_TEST fix got in.
>
> Sounds like I should merge the kbuild tree, rather than cherry-picking
> from linux-next? I will adjust.
I've done this merge correctly now and pushed a forced update on the kspp tree.
-Kees
>
> Sorry for the confusion!
>
> -Kees
>
> --
> Kees Cook
> Chrome OS & Brillo Security
--
Kees Cook
Chrome OS & Brillo Security
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: linux-next: duplicate patches in the kspp and kbuild trees
2016-06-13 23:57 ` Kees Cook
@ 2016-06-14 4:32 ` Stephen Rothwell
2016-06-14 13:01 ` Michal Marek
0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2016-06-14 4:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Kees Cook; +Cc: Michal Marek, Linux-Next, LKML, Emese Revfy
Hi Kees,
On Mon, 13 Jun 2016 16:57:15 -0700 Kees Cook <keescook@google.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 4:53 PM, Kees Cook <keescook@google.com> wrote:
> >
> > Strange, I pulled these directly from linux-next. Michal had an
> > auto-responder saying he was going to be out-of-office, so I wanted to
> > make sure the !COMPILE_TEST fix got in.
> >
> > Sounds like I should merge the kbuild tree, rather than cherry-picking
> > from linux-next? I will adjust.
Cherry-picking produces new commits (with new SHA1s etc), while merging
(or rebasing on top of the other versions) will have the same commits
(not just patches).
Having the same commits means that they never produce conflicts after
further changes to the same files (unless both sides of the merge make
further changes to the same files).
> I've done this merge correctly now and pushed a forced update on the kspp tree.
Thanks for that. Now you just have to hope that Michal never rebases
that part of his tree from under you. (Michal: hint! :-))
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: linux-next: duplicate patches in the kspp and kbuild trees
2016-06-14 4:32 ` Stephen Rothwell
@ 2016-06-14 13:01 ` Michal Marek
2016-06-14 14:13 ` Stephen Rothwell
0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Michal Marek @ 2016-06-14 13:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stephen Rothwell, Kees Cook; +Cc: Linux-Next, LKML, Emese Revfy
On 2016-06-14 06:32, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Kees,
>
> On Mon, 13 Jun 2016 16:57:15 -0700 Kees Cook <keescook@google.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 4:53 PM, Kees Cook <keescook@google.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Strange, I pulled these directly from linux-next. Michal had an
>>> auto-responder saying he was going to be out-of-office, so I wanted to
>>> make sure the !COMPILE_TEST fix got in.
>>>
>>> Sounds like I should merge the kbuild tree, rather than cherry-picking
>>> from linux-next? I will adjust.
>
> Cherry-picking produces new commits (with new SHA1s etc), while merging
> (or rebasing on top of the other versions) will have the same commits
> (not just patches).
>
> Having the same commits means that they never produce conflicts after
> further changes to the same files (unless both sides of the merge make
> further changes to the same files).
>
>> I've done this merge correctly now and pushed a forced update on the kspp tree.
>
> Thanks for that. Now you just have to hope that Michal never rebases
> that part of his tree from under you. (Michal: hint! :-))
I won't :). Kees, are you going to keep the patch in your tree and send
it to Linus once kbuild is in? Or shall I take it (which would
temporarily result in another duplication...).
Thanks,
Michal
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: linux-next: duplicate patches in the kspp and kbuild trees
2016-06-14 13:01 ` Michal Marek
@ 2016-06-14 14:13 ` Stephen Rothwell
2016-06-14 16:39 ` Kees Cook
0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2016-06-14 14:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Michal Marek; +Cc: Kees Cook, Linux-Next, LKML, Emese Revfy
Hi Michal,
On Tue, 14 Jun 2016 15:01:42 +0200 Michal Marek <mmarek@suse.cz> wrote:
>
> I won't :). Kees, are you going to keep the patch in your tree and send
> it to Linus once kbuild is in? Or shall I take it (which would
> temporarily result in another duplication...).
Or Kees could send you a pull request ...
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: linux-next: duplicate patches in the kspp and kbuild trees
2016-06-14 14:13 ` Stephen Rothwell
@ 2016-06-14 16:39 ` Kees Cook
2016-07-26 22:19 ` Michal Marek
0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Kees Cook @ 2016-06-14 16:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stephen Rothwell; +Cc: Michal Marek, Linux-Next, LKML, Emese Revfy
On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 7:13 AM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> Hi Michal,
>
> On Tue, 14 Jun 2016 15:01:42 +0200 Michal Marek <mmarek@suse.cz> wrote:
>>
>> I won't :). Kees, are you going to keep the patch in your tree and send
>> it to Linus once kbuild is in? Or shall I take it (which would
>> temporarily result in another duplication...).
>
> Or Kees could send you a pull request ...
My head hurts. :) How about this: since a pull request would (I think)
end up pulling the other unrelated kspp patches, how about you take
the patch into kbuild, and once it's there, I'll just remove it from
my tree (since it's on top).
-Kees
--
Kees Cook
Chrome OS & Brillo Security
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: linux-next: duplicate patches in the kspp and kbuild trees
2016-06-14 16:39 ` Kees Cook
@ 2016-07-26 22:19 ` Michal Marek
2016-07-26 23:09 ` Kees Cook
0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Michal Marek @ 2016-07-26 22:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Kees Cook, Stephen Rothwell; +Cc: Linux-Next, LKML, Emese Revfy
Dne 14.6.2016 v 18:39 Kees Cook napsal(a):
> On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 7:13 AM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>> Hi Michal,
>>
>> On Tue, 14 Jun 2016 15:01:42 +0200 Michal Marek <mmarek@suse.cz> wrote:
>>>
>>> I won't :). Kees, are you going to keep the patch in your tree and send
>>> it to Linus once kbuild is in? Or shall I take it (which would
>>> temporarily result in another duplication...).
>>
>> Or Kees could send you a pull request ...
>
> My head hurts. :) How about this: since a pull request would (I think)
> end up pulling the other unrelated kspp patches, how about you take
> the patch into kbuild, and once it's there, I'll just remove it from
> my tree (since it's on top).
Sorry, I forgot about this one. It's cherry-picked onto my kbuild branch
now.
Michal
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: linux-next: duplicate patches in the kspp and kbuild trees
2016-07-26 22:19 ` Michal Marek
@ 2016-07-26 23:09 ` Kees Cook
2016-07-27 7:52 ` Michal Marek
0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Kees Cook @ 2016-07-26 23:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Michal Marek; +Cc: Stephen Rothwell, Linux-Next, LKML, Emese Revfy
On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 3:19 PM, Michal Marek <mmarek@suse.cz> wrote:
> Dne 14.6.2016 v 18:39 Kees Cook napsal(a):
>> On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 7:13 AM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>>> Hi Michal,
>>>
>>> On Tue, 14 Jun 2016 15:01:42 +0200 Michal Marek <mmarek@suse.cz> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I won't :). Kees, are you going to keep the patch in your tree and send
>>>> it to Linus once kbuild is in? Or shall I take it (which would
>>>> temporarily result in another duplication...).
>>>
>>> Or Kees could send you a pull request ...
>>
>> My head hurts. :) How about this: since a pull request would (I think)
>> end up pulling the other unrelated kspp patches, how about you take
>> the patch into kbuild, and once it's there, I'll just remove it from
>> my tree (since it's on top).
>
> Sorry, I forgot about this one. It's cherry-picked onto my kbuild branch
> now.
Okay, no worries. I've removed it from my tree and merged your
kbuild/for-next branch into my for-next/kspp branch.
Let me know once you've sent the kbuild/for-next pull request, and I
can follow it up with the the entropy plugin pull request.
Thanks!
-Kees
--
Kees Cook
Brillo & Chrome OS Security
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: linux-next: duplicate patches in the kspp and kbuild trees
2016-07-26 23:09 ` Kees Cook
@ 2016-07-27 7:52 ` Michal Marek
0 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Michal Marek @ 2016-07-27 7:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Kees Cook; +Cc: Stephen Rothwell, Linux-Next, LKML, Emese Revfy
On 2016-07-27 01:09, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 3:19 PM, Michal Marek <mmarek@suse.cz> wrote:
>> Dne 14.6.2016 v 18:39 Kees Cook napsal(a):
>>> On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 7:13 AM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>>>> Hi Michal,
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, 14 Jun 2016 15:01:42 +0200 Michal Marek <mmarek@suse.cz> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I won't :). Kees, are you going to keep the patch in your tree and send
>>>>> it to Linus once kbuild is in? Or shall I take it (which would
>>>>> temporarily result in another duplication...).
>>>>
>>>> Or Kees could send you a pull request ...
>>>
>>> My head hurts. :) How about this: since a pull request would (I think)
>>> end up pulling the other unrelated kspp patches, how about you take
>>> the patch into kbuild, and once it's there, I'll just remove it from
>>> my tree (since it's on top).
>>
>> Sorry, I forgot about this one. It's cherry-picked onto my kbuild branch
>> now.
>
> Okay, no worries. I've removed it from my tree and merged your
> kbuild/for-next branch into my for-next/kspp branch.
>
> Let me know once you've sent the kbuild/for-next pull request, and I
> can follow it up with the the entropy plugin pull request.
I actually send the individual branches of kbuild.git: "kbuild",
"kconfig" and "misc". for-next is just a convenience for linux-next
integration.
Michal
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2016-07-27 7:52 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2016-06-13 23:40 linux-next: duplicate patches in the kspp and kbuild trees Stephen Rothwell
2016-06-13 23:53 ` Kees Cook
2016-06-13 23:57 ` Kees Cook
2016-06-14 4:32 ` Stephen Rothwell
2016-06-14 13:01 ` Michal Marek
2016-06-14 14:13 ` Stephen Rothwell
2016-06-14 16:39 ` Kees Cook
2016-07-26 22:19 ` Michal Marek
2016-07-26 23:09 ` Kees Cook
2016-07-27 7:52 ` Michal Marek
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).