From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760532AbYFPHKc (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Jun 2008 03:10:32 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754301AbYFPHKY (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Jun 2008 03:10:24 -0400 Received: from mx3.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.1.138]:56492 "EHLO mx3.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753697AbYFPHKX (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Jun 2008 03:10:23 -0400 Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2008 09:10:00 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: Vegard Nossum Cc: Pekka Enberg , Thomas Gleixner , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] kmemcheck: divide and conquer Message-ID: <20080616071000.GA9320@elte.hu> References: <20080613140057.GA25833@damson.getinternet.no> <20080614063114.GA24188@elte.hu> <19f34abd0806140139i70a5056ehbd8a6f5df81549e4@mail.gmail.com> <20080614090023.GA13798@elte.hu> <19f34abd0806140217x1ea73a8k1cae18a12128a2b1@mail.gmail.com> <20080616051504.GA3492@elte.hu> <19f34abd0806152355h65876c54r1ae0aa156e839db2@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <19f34abd0806152355h65876c54r1ae0aa156e839db2@mail.gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-ELTE-VirusStatus: clean X-ELTE-SpamScore: -1.5 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-1.5 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.2.3 -1.5 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Vegard Nossum wrote: > For some reason, there is no in my repository, so > I assume the change came from another branch. In fact, I should have > included , but that doesn't contain the right > definitions in the tip/auto-test branch. > > Yep, seems to be > > commit 9b7dc567d03d74a1fbae84e88949b6a60d922d82 > Author: Thomas Gleixner > Date: Fri May 2 20:10:09 2008 +0200 > > x86: unify interrupt vector defines > > I also can't seem to get the redefined warnings, so I assume that's > also just an indirect conflict with other -tip changes. > > Right now, I am reluctant to apply your fix because it means that > kmemcheck tree won't build as it is. In general, what's the way to > resolve these things? Do you have another branch, *-fixes, where these > fixlets can go until either of the conflicting changesets are merged > upstream? If so, it seems that that would be the right place for this > patch. Do you agree or do you have another solution? :-) yes, i solved it the following "Git way": i did a --no-commit merge of the tip/x86/irq tree into the tip/kmemcheck2 branch and then "git-cherry-pick --no-commit"-ed the fix and thus made it a part of that merge commit. This way the build failure is never visible during bisection either. tip/kmemcheck2 is a temporary topic tree: it contains the pull from your tree and i'm testing it at the moment. It will be renamed to tip/kmemcheck once it has passed testing. btw., due to kmemcheck not being rebased anymore, this will work out just fine in the future: i can pull fixes from your tree into tip/kmemcheck and it will just all get sorted out by Git, despite the cross-merge to tip/x86/irq. If you rebased kmemcheck i'd have to do rather difficult (and error-prone and harder to trust) manual merges every time you put a kmemcheck fix into your tree, and any breakages introduced by new kmemcheck fixes would not be easily bisectable either. Ingo