Feeding containers patches into linux-next

Feeding containers patches into linux-next

[Dave Hansen]

We've been basically merging containers patches through Andrew and -mm
for a while now.  It seems that some of the testing is starting to move
toward linux-next.

Has anyone considered what it would take for us to get a tree pulled
into there?  

-- Dave

Re: Feeding containers patches into linux-next

[Serge E. Hallyn]

Quoting Dave Hansen (dave-23VcF4HTsmIX0ybBhKVfKdBPR1lH4CV8@public.gmane.org):
> We've been basically merging containers patches through Andrew and -mm
> for a while now.  It seems that some of the testing is starting to move
> toward linux-next.
> 
> Has anyone considered what it would take for us to get a tree pulled
> into there?  

I'd guess we would need to:

	1. Beg Stephen :)
	2. Work with the lkml community to decide which patches are
	   sufficiently agreed-upon at least in principle to go into
	   linux-next.  I really think Eric's netns/sysfs patchset
	   belongs there.  I'd also like to see the freezer container
	   patchset.
	3. Pick someone to be maintain that tree.  Ideally someone
	   whom everyone here can agree upon.

-serge

Re: Feeding containers patches into linux-next

[Eric W. Biederman]

"Serge E. Hallyn" <serue-r/Jw6+rmf7HQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org> writes:

> Quoting Dave Hansen (dave-23VcF4HTsmIX0ybBhKVfKdBPR1lH4CV8@public.gmane.org):
>> We've been basically merging containers patches through Andrew and -mm
>> for a while now.  It seems that some of the testing is starting to move
>> toward linux-next.
>> 
>> Has anyone considered what it would take for us to get a tree pulled
>> into there?  
>
> I'd guess we would need to:
>
> 	1. Beg Stephen :)
> 	2. Work with the lkml community to decide which patches are
> 	   sufficiently agreed-upon at least in principle to go into
> 	   linux-next.  I really think Eric's netns/sysfs patchset
> 	   belongs there.  I'd also like to see the freezer container
> 	   patchset.
> 	3. Pick someone to be maintain that tree.  Ideally someone
> 	   whom everyone here can agree upon.

I think Andrew said he intends to get most of -mm into linux-next
as soon in the next release cycle.  So this may not be a long term
problem.

The classic challenge is that we really need most of the patches to go
through other maintainers because they are not for subsystems we
maintain.  So I am fairly certain things like our network namespace
work will show up in linux-next because they show up in net-next-2.6.

Eric

Re: Feeding containers patches into linux-next

[Dave Hansen]

On Tue, 2008-07-15 at 10:50 -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> The classic challenge is that we really need most of the patches to go
> through other maintainers because they are not for subsystems we
> maintain.  So I am fairly certain things like our network namespace
> work will show up in linux-next because they show up in net-next-2.6.

But, there are things like the mqueue patches that are against areas
that really have no maintainers.  Do you think there will be many more
like that?  

-- Dave

Re: Feeding containers patches into linux-next

[Eric W. Biederman]

Dave Hansen <dave-23VcF4HTsmIX0ybBhKVfKdBPR1lH4CV8@public.gmane.org> writes:

> On Tue, 2008-07-15 at 10:50 -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>> The classic challenge is that we really need most of the patches to go
>> through other maintainers because they are not for subsystems we
>> maintain.  So I am fairly certain things like our network namespace
>> work will show up in linux-next because they show up in net-next-2.6.
>
> But, there are things like the mqueue patches that are against areas
> that really have no maintainers.  Do you think there will be many more
> like that?  

Probably.  We are touching parts of the kernel that rarely change.

Eric

Re: Feeding containers patches into linux-next

[Dave Hansen]

On Tue, 2008-07-15 at 11:56 -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Dave Hansen <dave-23VcF4HTsmIX0ybBhKVfKdBPR1lH4CV8@public.gmane.org> writes:
> > On Tue, 2008-07-15 at 10:50 -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> >> The classic challenge is that we really need most of the patches to go
> >> through other maintainers because they are not for subsystems we
> >> maintain.  So I am fairly certain things like our network namespace
> >> work will show up in linux-next because they show up in net-next-2.6.
> >
> > But, there are things like the mqueue patches that are against areas
> > that really have no maintainers.  Do you think there will be many more
> > like that?  
> 
> Probably.  We are touching parts of the kernel that rarely change.

Would having something that feeds into linux-next help make some of this
easier?

-- Dave