Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 5 Aug 2009 09:42:08 +0200 | From | Borislav Petkov <> | Subject | Re: Rebasing the edac-amd tree (Was: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the edac-amd tree with Linus' tree) |
| |
Hi,
On Wed, Aug 05, 2009 at 04:40:32PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > On Wed, 5 Aug 2009 08:22:15 +0200 Borislav Petkov <petkovbb@googlemail.com> wrote: > > > > thanks and yes, you're right. The former patch is less intrusive > > and we opted for that one since it is really late in the -rc cycle > > but the latter cleans up stuff so that code flow becomes much more > > understandable. I'll rediff later and sorry for the inconvenience. > > As an alternative to rebasing, you could merge Linus' current tree into > yours and do the merge fixup there. This is not particularly necessary, > as the fixup is fairly simple. Though you may want to do that sometime > before you ask Linus to merge your tree.
that's what I'd normally do but I'm carrying some more patches which have to go to -tip and I'd rather rebase to have a clean history and all.
> > By the way, I see that you're merging edac-amd before tip and I'm going > > to need to rebase my tree against tip in the next couple of days since > > it depends on a bunch of stuff in it, so could you please switch the > > merge order of the two trees so that edac-amd goes after tip? > > Again, instead of rebasing, you could just merge in the branches from tip > that you depend on. You need to make sure that you only depend on stable > (i.e. non rebasing) branches in the tip tree, not on the branch > (auto-latest) that is actually merged into linux-next. Please discuss > this with Ingo.
Yep, it happened yesterday.
> > I will move the edac-amd tree to after the tip tree tomorrow.
Thanks.
-- Regards/Gruss, Boris.
| |