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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Wed, 16 Jan 2013 08:27:54 -0800
From:	Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>
To:	Tony Prisk <linux@...sktech.co.nz>
Cc:	Stephen Warren <swarren@...dia.com>,
	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
	Colin Cross <ccross@...roid.com>, linux-next@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the tegra tree with the arm-soc tree

Hi,

On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 8:52 PM, Tony Prisk <linux@...sktech.co.nz> wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-01-15 at 21:32 -0700, Stephen Warren wrote:
>> On 01/15/2013 08:49 PM, Tony Prisk wrote:
>> > On Wed, 2013-01-16 at 14:14 +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>> >> Hi all,
>> >>
>> >> Today's linux-next merge of the tegra tree got a conflict in
>> >> drivers/clocksource/Makefile between commit ff7ec345f0ec ("timer: vt8500:
>> >> Move timer code to drivers/clocksource") from the arm-soc tree and commit
>> >> ac0fd9eca3ba ("ARM: tegra: move timer.c to drivers/clocksource/") from
>> >> the tegra tree.
>> >>
>> >> I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action
>> >> is required).
>> >>
>> >
>> > I don't know about everyone else, but I feel the preference should be to
>> > keep things alphabetized where possible to help avoid with merge
>> > conflicts later on. This is always a problem when we start tacking
>> > things on the end of lists.
>> >
>> > I realise this Kconfig is not alphabetized anyway, but it's never too
>> > early to start on the 'right' path.
>>
>> Sounds like a good idea, but the issue is: When to do the initial sort
>> so it doesn't conflict with all the adds in a kernel cycle... Post and
>> immediately commit a new patch near the end of the merge window?
>
> Given that the maintainer can quite safely do the patch (sorry
> maintainers), I don't see any reason why it couldn't be done at the
> point where they stop accepting patches for the merge-window. Once the
> patches are stopped, sort the list in one last patch.
>
> It makes sense to get it done in this window if possible as the Kconfig
> will only get bigger as time goes on, making sorting it more time
> consuming.

Actually, Russell wen through and reordered these not long ago, if I
remember correctly. The current ordering is the same as in the
structure definition, and should be kept that way.


-Olof
--
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/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ