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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2014 16:21:02 -0400 From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org> To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org> Cc: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>, Stewart Smith <stewart@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the driver-core tree Hello, On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 07:14:52AM +1100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > It's generally consider bad taste to pull entire trees into each > other :-) I know Stephen isn't fan of it... I wouldn't say it's considered "generally" bad taste. For one-off changes, maybe. This was a rather large restructuring of the whole thing, so actually duplicating all the rather significant commits would be a lot worse. > I'd rather have just that series (or even better, just the patches > introducing the new function) in a topic branch, itself pulled into > both driver-core-next and my tree. > > Can you produce that ? (I need a non-rebase guarantee though). It's a series of rather complex patches. I really don't think duplicating them is a good idea. We can either resurrect the old API to kill it again or set up a merge branch which I don't think is too unusual in situations like this. Thanks. -- tejun -- 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