From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrew Morton Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for June 5 Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2008 01:30:58 -0700 Message-ID: <20080606013058.e5d52c97.akpm@linux-foundation.org> References: <20080605175217.cee497f3.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <20080605195604.41623687.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20080606071707.GB9708@elte.hu> <20080606072536.GA19334@elte.hu> <20080606003327.9ac0e91b.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20080606074137.GA28962@elte.hu> <20080606004743.a78180c3.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20080606175358.a439d1bb.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <20080606010149.4d757b92.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20080606182206.8bc36f71.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from smtp1.linux-foundation.org ([140.211.169.13]:58183 "EHLO smtp1.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752688AbYFFIb7 (ORCPT ); Fri, 6 Jun 2008 04:31:59 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20080606182206.8bc36f71.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Stephen Rothwell Cc: Ingo Molnar , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, LKML , the arch/x86 maintainers On Fri, 6 Jun 2008 18:22:06 +1000 Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi Andrew, > > On Fri, 6 Jun 2008 01:01:49 -0700 Andrew Morton wrote: > > > > Well yes - I just bodged it by hand then unbodged it later. But we > > have a bisection break there. Admittedly a minor one, unless the bug > > you're bisecting for requires that kprobes be configured. But it would > > be nice to squish it. > > > > I hope Ingo isn't following this > > once-you've-checked-it-in-you-can't-fix-it stupidity :( > > Its a break caused by the merge of the ftrace tree into the linux-next > tree (because at the point I merge the ftrace tree, linux-next contains > the rcu tree which has moves stuff into rculist.h), so logically that > patch should become part of the merge commit. If it was part of the > merge, you could never bisect to a point where you got this build > breakage. > > Each tree is fine on its own if you go one step back from the merge. Well OK. But patches in fact _do_ go into Linux as a single linear stream of commits. But the whole git model ignores that reality and here we see the result. And saying "git doesn't work like that - you don't understand" just doesn't cut it. It is a tool's job to permit humans to implement the workflow which they wish to follow. Not to go and force them into doing something inferior. Sigh. /usualrant