From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <50F65EB3.1000301@siemens.com> Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 09:02:59 +0100 From: Jan Kiszka MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <50F19CE1.5080106@zultron.com> <50F19DE4.4030805@xenomai.org> <50F239E1.40400@zultron.com> <50F2A59D.5050600@xenomai.org> <50F30781.3050302@zultron.com> <50F30DE5.7030007@xenomai.org> <50F3F36A.8050804@siemens.com> <50F45358.1020601@xenomai.org> <50F458E9.7080504@siemens.com> <50F4594C.8090907@xenomai.org> <50F45E87.9030701@siemens.com> <50F46D0E.9000706@xenomai.org> <50F53F0E.7020604@siemens.com> <50F54641.3010802@xenomai.org> <50F546E8.2050606@xenomai.org> <50F549AD.7040508@siemens.com> <50F55D33.3020205@xenomai.org> <50F55E22.9030308@siemens.com> <50F56074.50203@xenomai.org> <50F5B08D.60504@xenomai.org> In-Reply-To: <50F5B08D.60504@xenomai.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Xenomai] 3.5.7 "I-pipe: could not find timer" (Was: Re: Kernel OOPS during regression tests) List-Id: Discussions about the Xenomai project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Gilles Chanteperdrix Cc: John Morris , Xenomai On 2013-01-15 20:39, Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote: > On 01/15/2013 02:58 PM, Philippe Gerum wrote: > >> On 01/15/2013 02:48 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote: >>> On 2013-01-15 14:44, Philippe Gerum wrote: >>>> On 01/15/2013 01:21 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote: >>>>> On 2013-01-15 13:09, Philippe Gerum wrote: >>>>>> On 01/15/2013 01:06 PM, Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote: >>>>>>> On 01/15/2013 12:35 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 2013-01-14 21:39, Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote: >>>>>>>>> Done, also note that my current work is the for-core-3.5.7 branch, not >>>>>>>>> the for-core-3.5 branch. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Both branches point to the same commit ATM. I suppose you didn't push >>>>>>>> the new for-core-3.5.7 version yet. Once done, I'll rebase my stuff on top. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Sorry, pushed. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Please everybody, make sure to eventually resync with my tree, this is >>>>>> becoming a mess when merging your stuff here. TIA, >>>>> >>>>> I'm fetching from you regularly, but your public tree contains no >>>>> changes for 3.5, sorry. >>>>> >>>> >>>> You must mean no change for 3.5.3 since the last stable pipeline release >>>> I pushed out. I'm seeing several breakages when merging the very latest >>>> work, I'm solving this with Gilles. >>> >>> I mean that I have no clue what I should resolve. My branch was based on >>> your core-3.5 branch, the latest publicly available version. I've just >>> rebased it on top of Gilles' 3.5.7 queue - without any conflicts. So >>> what are you talking about? >>> >> >> I'm talking about conflicts in pgtable.h, apic.c with the atomic counter >> braindamage and stuff like this. I'm not asking you to fix anything in >> your tree, I'm pulling from Gilles' trees almost exclusively, and had >> issues with those. I raised an alert about painful merges happening >> lately, and a recommendation to avoid these. Gilles fixed the issue on >> his end, and the merge now resolves as a fast forward, as expected. >> Issue closed. > > > These were issues due to rebasing. Rebasings makes merging incrementally > harder, will avoid this in the future. Rebasing is not bad per se and, where possible, better than leaving an un-bisectable commit series behind - IMHO. I suppose Philippe started pulling from your queue before you reordered/updated it again. That's why I didn't send out a pull request yet - mine wasn't done. I'm trying to formalize this process here, i.e. never rebase after releasing a queue for pulling. At the same time, upstream should not pull or pick in a way that makes life harder for downstream. Jan -- Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT RTC ITP SDP-DE Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux