linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the bcm2835 tree with the arm-soc tree

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 9 Dec 2014 08:21:12 +0000
From:	Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
To:	Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>
Cc:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
	Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>,
	Matthias Klein <matthias.klein@...ux.com>,
	Hauke Mehrtens <hauke@...ke-m.de>,
	Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@...il.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-next@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the bcm2835 tree with the arm-soc
 tree

On Mon, 08 Dec 2014, Stephen Warren wrote:

> On 12/08/2014 09:51 AM, Lee Jones wrote:
> >On Mon, 08 Dec 2014, Stephen Warren wrote:
> ...
> >>The primary purpose of the kernel.org linux-rpi.git repo is for
> >>staging patches into arm-soc/linux-next. As such, just like any
> >>other similar repo, users should expect at least the for-xxx (e.g.
> >>for-next) branches to get reset as kernel versions tick over, in
> >>order to contain the content for the next kernel. Anyone using those
> >>branches for anything else (e.g. local development) simply has to be
> >>prepared to do a rebase themselves when that happens.
> >
> >I agree with this.
> >
> >>Equally, and patches that get sent to arm-soc should probably never
> >>be applied to linux-rpi.git; anything that gets applied to
> >>linux-rpi.git should get sent to arm-soc as a pull request. That
> >>avoids duplicate commits.
> >
> >I'm okay to follow this rule if my perception of the tree is changed.
> >The current view is that this repo can be used by engineers/hobbyists
> >as a single resource to pick up RPi patches which are yet to complete
> >their full transition into Mainline.
> >
> >Arnd and I had a discussion where I flagged my concerns about these
> >kinds of conflicts.  The outcome was that as long as the patches were
> >simple enough, then no conflict should arise.  Unfortunately this
> >turned out not to be quite true.
> >
> >So I'm happy with whatever.  Stephen, the repo is your concept.  I'll
> >play it however you want me to play it.  As the merge-window is now
> >open I'm going to eradicate rpi/for-next in any case.
> 
> Eradicate or reset? If you delete it, Stephen Rothwell will have a
> problem fetching it when creating linux-next. Usually to empty out
> the for-next branch, you'd reset it to some recent Linus tag; 3.18
> seems like a good one at present.

Yes, in this case eradicate == `git reset <blah>`.

-- 
Lee Jones
Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/