Messages in this thread |  | | From | Miguel Ojeda <> | Date | Wed, 3 Oct 2018 00:04:29 +0200 | Subject | Re: [GIT PULL linux-next] Add Compiler Attributes tree |
| |
Hi Stephen,
On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 11:11 PM Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote: > > Hi Miguel, > > On Tue, 2 Oct 2018 15:47:12 +0200 Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > The Compiler Attributes series has been stable for 10+ days. To > > increase testing before 4.20, I would to request it being picked up > > for -next. > > > > The changes w.r.t. v5 in the LKML: > > > > - Rebased on top of next-20180928, which required removing > > Unfortunately, trees/branches included in linux-next must be based on > something stable (usually Linus' tree, but it could be another > tree/branch that is included in linux-next that does not rebase). > Linux-next itself rebases every day, so snything based on it would drag > in a previous version of all the other trees :-(
I assumed you could apply changes as a diff/patches/cherry-pick, not as a merge, for those that went on top of others (so that at the new merge window, conflicts were already solved). Otherwise, why are next-* tags/branches provided anyway?
> > > aligned_largest, which was removed by 9503cd9cbaba > > ("include/linux/compiler*.h: add version detection to > > asm_volatile_goto"). > > That commit is from Andrew's patch series which also rebases (usually > at least every week), so you cannot depend on it.
Then who is solving the conflict?
Thanks!
Cheers, Miguel
|  |