From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de (Uwe =?iso-8859-1?Q?Kleine-K=F6nig?=) Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2010 11:12:45 +0100 Subject: [GIT PULL] pxa: patches for next merge window In-Reply-To: <20100301094820.GA10863@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> References: <20100225205113.GF3101@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20100225212915.GA24043@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20100228161449.GD16745@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20100301093927.GC29952@pengutronix.de> <20100301094820.GA10863@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> Message-ID: <20100301101245.GB16049@pengutronix.de> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Hello, > > I'd prefer a). And if a submaintainer "doesn't behave" next time either > > both trees are pulled making the arm tree as ugly as are the others > > sometimes or the second pull request is declined if Russell notes it > > early enough (maybe supported by some script work). ~/gsrc/linux-2.6$ git rev-parse linus/master 30ff056c42c665b9ea535d8515890857ae382540 ~/gsrc/linux-2.6$ git rev-list v2.6.31..linus/master | while read rev; do git show $rev | git patch-id; done | sort > dup ~/gsrc/linux-2.6$ uniq -w 40 -d dup | wc -l 126 (Assuming that did what I intended (and different patches don't share patch ids) this means there are 126 patches between v2.6.31 and today that exist twice (or more) in Linus' tree.) I havn't checked any of them but seeing this I don't consider Eric's two duplicated commits to be that important. Still it would be nice to pay attention not to introduce them in the future of course. Best regards Uwe -- Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-K?nig | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |