From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff Garzik Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/86] PATA fixes Date: Thu, 03 Dec 2009 15:11:19 -0500 Message-ID: <4B181B67.5080503@garzik.org> References: <20091125170218.5446.13513.sendpatchset@localhost> <200912031339.14440.bzolnier@gmail.com> <4B17FB37.2030501@garzik.org> <200912032045.48728.bzolnier@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail-gx0-f226.google.com ([209.85.217.226]:52653 "EHLO mail-gx0-f226.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753285AbZLCULP (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Dec 2009 15:11:15 -0500 In-Reply-To: <200912032045.48728.bzolnier@gmail.com> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz Cc: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 12/03/2009 02:45 PM, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote: > On Thursday 03 December 2009 06:53:59 pm Jeff Garzik wrote: >> On 12/03/2009 07:39 AM, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote: >>> On Thursday 03 December 2009 09:07:41 am Jeff Garzik wrote: >>>> The merge window is upon us, which by strict rules means that anything >>>> not already in libata-dev.git#upstream needs to wait until 2.6.34. >>>> >>>> However, bug fixes and the like should definitely be in 2.6.33. >>>> ->init_host is definitely 2.6.34 material. Some of the other stuff >>>> could go either way. >> >>> If you would like to apply some of my patches to 2.6.33 you are more than >>> welcome to do it. I can even prepare separate git tree with specific changes >>> to make it easier for you once you tell me which changes you would like to >>> see in it. >> >> OK, great. >> >> Can you prepare a patchset containing only fixes? Comment-only changes >> are acceptable too. Trivial changes too, if they are extremely trivial :) >> >> Include nothing that adds features, removes or unifies drivers, etc. > > Since this is pretty high-level description and some changes fall into > many categories at once (i.e. addition of proper PCI Power Management > handling could be considered both as a fix and as a feature) I prepared > a rather conservative set of changes (which means that unfortunately > it misses many enhancements available in my tree): > >> Please do it in standard kernel submit form, which is either >> (a) repost the patches (yes, again) being submitted for 2.6.33, or >> (b) a standard git pull request, which includes shortlog, diffstat, and >> all-in-one diff. > > Thank you for the detailed explanation of the standard kernel submit > form (I wonder how would I know this otherwise :) but the thing is that > at the current moment I'm not submitting anything to the upstream. Ok, that explains my confusion, then. I had thought you intended to get this stuff upstream, and into users' hands. > That's it. While this may sound strange to some people it turns out > that in practice it is much less hassle for me personally to keep some > of trees outside of the (sometimes greatly overrated) upstream. > > If knowing the above you still would like to include the aforementioned > set of changes in your libata-dev tree they are at kernel.org now. I will go through this batch and cherry-pick. The build fix is already in my tree. Existing kernel practice (and previous comments) indicate that lists of known issues do not belong in Kconfig. Will take a look at the other stuff... Thanks, Jeff