On 5 Mar 2005 at 8:04, Nish Aravamudan wrote:

> On Sat, 05 Mar 2005 11:33:37 +0200, Stephen Biggs
> <yrgrknmxpzlk@gawab.com> wrote:
> > On 4 Mar 2005 at 8:57, Greg KH wrote:
> > 
> > > On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 07:49:45AM -0800, Randy.Dunlap wrote:
> > > > Stephen Biggs wrote:
> > > > >Trying to comple the latest version (2.6.11-rc5-mm1) gives a huge amount
> > > > >of warnings in a lot of files due to printf formats (and a couple of
> > > > >other minor issues) that have %lx instead of %llx for the "start" element
> > > > >in the pci_resource struct whose type was changed from u32 to u64.
> > > > >
> > > > >These are relatively easy to fix and need to be fixed because of
> > > > >potential stack issues with var arg functions like printk and friends.
> > > > >
> > > > >My question is: should I do this or is someone else working on this,
> > > > >perhaps a better fix than simply changing the majority of occurrences of
> > > > >"%lx" to "%llx"?
> > > >
> > > > I read messages on lkml that the pci resource patch was being dropped
> > > > temporarily to fix some issues.... Perhaps its patch submitter will
> > > > be fixing those, I dunno.
> > >
> > > Odds are, it will be me :(
> > >
> > > So yes, I will gladly take those kinds of patches.
> > 
> > Yes, OK, I'll start working on it soon.
> > 
> > Quick question: I see these problems on 2.6.11-rc5-mm1 but NOT on the
> > mainline kernel of 2.6.11.  Also, see my previous email about 2.6.11-kj
> > patch not applying cleanly at all to the rc5-mm1 BUT applies perfectly to
> > the mainline 2.6.11.
> > 
> > Which kernel version should I be working with?  Since there is now a
> > release of 2.6.11, isn't the proper version for us now 2.6.12-rc1, as
> > soon as it's created??
> > 
> > I am confused.
> 
> I am not sure why you would think 2.6.11-kj would apply to anything
> except 2.6.11. That's why it's *2.6.11*-kj not 2.6.11-rc5-mm1-kj.
> That's the whole point of labelling the releases that way.

Yes, thanks for the clear explanation.

> 
> So, if you want to apply -kj, you apply to it's prefix. Sometimes,
> admittedly, it will apply with fuzz to other trees, but that's
> incidental.

Ok, this I can understand and accept.

> 
> Also, please read the threads regarding the new kernel naming
> procedure. You should apply your patches against mainline (currently
> 2.6.11), unless the issue only exists in -mm and the patch which
> causes the issue is also only in -mm.

Here is the source of my confusion:
http://lists.osdl.org/pipermail/kernel-janitors/2005-February/003315.html

... wherein Jim Nelson says, in part: "Work off of -mm, since most of the 
janitorial work will go through Andrew Morton's series for awhile before 
being pushed into mainline."

Can you please send me links to the threads you are referring to so I can 
read them for myself and get a grip on this?

However, even with the naming issues cleared up in my head, I am still 
confused by the other issue. I am assuming that the pci resource retype 
is only in -mm?  If so, I am still confused about which version to work 
off of.  That is, if I apply the -kj patch to the mainline, I should then 
apply the -mm patch that just now appeared in Andrew Morton's directore 
for the mainline?

Maybe this is moot right now, since I see that this particular patch WAS 
in 2.6.11-rc5-mm1, but is not in 2.6.11-mm1.  Guess I'll wait until this 
is placed back in.

> 
> Thanks,
> Nish
>