From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: bhat.srivatsa@gmail.com (Srivatsa Bhat) Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2012 03:42:18 +0530 Subject: Need help: Generating patch using git In-Reply-To: <20120201220554.GC893@kroah.com> References: <20120201220554.GC893@kroah.com> Message-ID: To: kernelnewbies@lists.kernelnewbies.org List-Id: kernelnewbies.lists.kernelnewbies.org On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 3:35 AM, Greg KH wrote: > On Thu, Feb 02, 2012 at 02:47:49AM +0530, Srivatsa Bhat wrote: > > Hi, > > > > On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 10:51 AM, amit mehta > wrote: > > > > > > > Also the kernel tree you are using seems to be Linus's mainline, is > > > that what you wanted or did you want to be making the patch > against a > > > linux-next kernel? > > > > My current goal is to send some patches to kernel janitor group > though I'm > > not > > sure if this group is still active or not. > > you mean to say that this is not the tree which i should be synced > to? If > > not > > then can you please send me the link to the relevant git repository ? > > > > > > > > Please note that linux-next is just a tree used for integration-testing. > I > > strongly suggest > > that you don't base your patches on linux-next. Basing it on current > mainline > > is generally a good idea. But if you are doing some significant > development, > > you should target the individual trees that the subsystem maintainers > maintain. > > > > To put it in simple terms, base your patch on current mainline and send > it to > > the appropriate people (use get_maintainer.pl in the scripts directory > to find > > whom to send it to). Then if the maintainer specifically asks you to > rebase > > your > > patch on some particular tree that he maintains, then do it. Then you > know what > > to do with patches related to that subsystem from next time onwards :-) > > As a subsystem maintainer, I strongly disagree with this. > > Do your work against linux-next, as that contains the different > subsystems already. You don't want to do something only to find out you > need to totally redo it, or just throw it away as someone else has > already done it (which is quite common for janitorial and other "simple" > tasks). > > Ok, that makes sense. > So please, either work against linux-next, or the subsystem-specific > tree, linux-next is usually easier, the odds of cross-subsystem merges > causing problems with your change, for the subsystem maintainer, are > very low, much lower than the fact that major changes might have already > happened. > I see your point, and I agree with you now. Thanks a lot Greg, for showing the right path! Regards, Srivatsa S. Bhat -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/pipermail/kernelnewbies/attachments/20120202/8b986e61/attachment.html