lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Jan]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 00/76] Synopsys ARC Linux kernel Port
On Friday 18 January 2013 08:42 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Friday 18 January 2013, Vineet Gupta wrote:
>>
>
> Hi Vineet,
>
> I've looked at the entire series again now, and it looks very good
> overall, I only had comments for tiny issues. With 76 patches in the
> series, I doubt that anybody is going to look through all of them
> again though.

v3 series addressing all comments is cooked and am about to send it out. I've made
2 bins of the patches to separate out the ones which have NOT changed since
v2. I'll send them under separate cover letters to make it easier for reviewers -
BTW addition of your ACKs is not being counted as changed - although it's a big
change for the patches :-)

> Are the patches already part of Linux-next? If not,
> I would recommend getting them in there as a preparation for merging
> in 3.9.

I have a few questions/clarifications in that regards.

(1) What are the logistics involved. Does it have to be a tag or a branch
(typically I see people have branches in next).

(2) Can Stephan pull my branch from github or do I need to be setup apriori on
kernel.org. If latter, whom do I need to contact.

(3) That branch will be ARC patches on top of Linus's 3.8 rc4. Actually for my
development, I'd also cherry picked a few patches from linux-next (soft and hard
dependencies from several different *next trees) - hard ones being

f13a366 CONFIG_GENERIC_SIGALTSTACK build breakage with asm-generic/syscalls.h [Al]
b6fca sysctl: Enable IA64 "ignore-unaligned-usertrap" to be used cross-arch [ia64]

Now when I put up a branch for Stephan I guess these should be taken out of ARC
branch otherwise merge into linux-next will fail ?

(4) Above series (pure ARC patches) merges fine in today's linux-next, except for
a patch touching init/Kconfig (already acked by parisc maintainer) which is
slightly different if based off 3.8-rc4 vs. linux-next (because of interim merge)
so I'm hoping my tree doesn't get "dropped" from linux-next because of that. But
then how will it get fixed.


> I would also recommend to only send incremental patches after that,
> as well as new versions of some of the patches if you decide to
> replace them based on comments you get.

Absolutely - I'm tired of rebasing and chopping/merging as well - so anything new
will be on top of these (no rebasing).

Thx,
-Vineet


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-01-24 10:43    [W:0.549 / U:1.648 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site