From: Michal Marek <mmarek@suse.cz>
To: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
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: Mon, 12 Sep 2016 11:03:08 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <e1cd32fd-6db2-0dc7-43c4-f678582326ad@suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160912125341.0596ed9f@roar.ozlabs.ibm.com>
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?
Michal
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-09-12 9:03 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 [this message]
2016-09-12 23:39 ` Stephen Rothwell
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=e1cd32fd-6db2-0dc7-43c4-f678582326ad@suse.cz \
--to=mmarek@suse.cz \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-next@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=npiggin@gmail.com \
--cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
/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).