linux-kernel - Re: Including Raspberry Pi -next trees in linux-next

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, 5 Jan 2016 15:52:40 -0700
From:	Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>
To:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
	Eric Anholt <eric@...olt.net>
Cc:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
	linux-rpi-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Including Raspberry Pi -next trees in linux-next

On 01/05/2016 03:32 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Eric,
>
> On Tue, 05 Jan 2016 22:26:33 +0100 Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> wrote:
>>
>> On Tuesday 05 January 2016 13:22:49 Stephen Warren wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> branches:
>>>>>> drm-vc4-next
>>>>>> bcm2835-dt-next
>>>>>> bcm2835-soc-next
>>>>>> bcm2835-drivers-next
>>>>>> bcm2385-defconfig-next
>>>>>> (bcm2835-maintainers-next is a placeholder since we have nothing for it
>>>>>> this round)
>>>
>>> Typically maintainers merge everything together into a single "for-next"
>>> to maintain a reasonable set of branches. I guess it doesn't affect me
>>> so my opinion isn't too relevant though:-)
>>
>> In my experience the common for-next branch works best because
>> you can change the set of branches that get merged into it as
>> needed. If there are 6 branches today, it's quite likely that there
>> will be another one in the future and if only one branch gets
>> merged into for-next, you don't need to worry about updating the list.
>
> Certainly, that would be easier for me.  Though you may want to keep
> the drm-vc4-next branch separate since that get merged via a different
> tree (and can appear at a different point in my merge list).
>
> It does mean an extra step for you i.e. you would need to merge all the
> relevant branches into the single "for-next" branch, but that should
> not be too big an imposition.

FWIW, I almost always build/test the for-next branch rather than (or 
sometimes in addition to) the individual branches, and since I do so 
much with that branch, I use some scripts to automate generating it, and 
pushing all the branches to kernel.org. The Tegra version of those 
scripts is at:

> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/tegra/maint-scripts.git/tree/

In particular, see merge-linux-tegra.sh and its configuration file 
tegra-branches.sh.dot. Also push-linux-tegra.sh does all the pushes.
--
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/