lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Dec]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: linux-next: question about the luto-misc tree
On Sun, Dec 14, 2014 at 4:03 AM, Paul E. McKenney
<paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 13, 2014 at 11:26:36PM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>> On Dec 13, 2014 10:58 PM, "Stephen Rothwell" <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>> >
>> > Hi Andy,
>> >
>> > The luto-misc tree seems to have a whole series of commits in it that
>> > have just bee removed from the rcu tree ... You really have to be very
>> > careful if you base your work on a tree that is regularly rebased.
>>
>> Hmm. They were there a couple days ago. Paul, what should I do about
>> this? I only need the one NMI nesting change for the stuff in
>> luto/next.
>>
>> > I also wonder if the other commits in that tree are destined for
>> > v3.19? If they are for v3.20, then they should not be in linux-next
>> > until after v3.19-rc1 has been released.
>>
>> They're for 3.20. I'll drop the whole series from the next branch for now.
>
> You mean the NMI nesting change below, correct? One approach would be
> to include the branch rcu/dev from my -rcu tree. Would that work for you?
>

That would work.

The problem is that, if you rebase again and I don't notice, then
it'll generate a pile of conflicts. Is there someway that I can flag
my next tree as depending on a certain commi existing in another tree
so that the scripts that generate linux-next will ignore it if the
base commit goes away?

--Andy


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-12-14 18:01    [W:0.352 / U:0.004 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site