From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-yw0-f49.google.com ([209.85.213.49]) by canuck.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.76 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1QwUEN-0005SF-Na for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Thu, 25 Aug 2011 07:20:06 +0000 Received: by ywp17 with SMTP id 17so1791862ywp.36 for ; Thu, 25 Aug 2011 00:20:01 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [RFC 0/5] fix data+OOB writes, add ioctl From: Artem Bityutskiy To: Brian Norris Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2011 10:21:50 +0300 In-Reply-To: References: <1313625029-19546-1-git-send-email-computersforpeace@gmail.com> <1314007366.2644.101.camel@sauron> <20110822120417.GA13515@parrot.com> <1314015423.2644.118.camel@sauron> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <1314256916.18988.27.camel@sauron> Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: Ricard Wanderlof , Mike Frysinger , Kevin Cernekee , "b35362@freescale.com" , "linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org" , Ivan Djelic , David Woodhouse , Matthew Creech Reply-To: dedekind1@gmail.com List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Wed, 2011-08-24 at 11:01 -0700, Brian Norris wrote: > On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 8:36 AM, Ricard Wanderlof > wrote: > ... > > I had a problem > > in that in the mtdchar.c I have it looks like this: > > Did you mean nand_base.c? > > > whereas your patch looks like it was made against a version which lacks the > > memsets. First I thought it was because I was running an older kernel > > (2.6.35), but I looked at HEAD of the linux-2.6 and mtd-2.6 trees at > > git.infradead.org, and it's the same there. So I'm not sure exactly which > > version your patch was made against. Perhaps it's obvious to someone but not > > me right now. > > My patches were based on l2-mtd-2.6.git, actually. David Woodhouse > rarely pulls patches into his mtd-2.6 tree, so I have moved to working > with Artem's l2-mtd-2.6 tree, where all the MTD work that's waiting > for upstream sits (some stuff's been there since May). This is not > obvious, and usually when it matters, I try to mention it in the patch > summaries. David's tree is desperately out-of-date now, I did not talk to him lately, he is not very reachable now. There are patches from May because David did merge anything this merge window, probably he had some issues/etc, let's hope he'll merge everything next merge window. May be he wanted to ask me to merge it, but I have been having vacation and was not available at the IRC chat. > Artem: is there any official change in policy on patch submission? I > see documentation that says to base off mtd-2.6.git, but I've been > using l2-mtd-2.6 to help you avoid merge conflicts: > http://www.linux-mtd.infradead.org/source.html There is no official policy, this all works because enthusiasts who just like MTD stuff and keep it alive. When I noticed that dwmw2 does not give MTD ML enough attention, I just started my l2 tree to help him - it was faster/easier for him to look with reviewed patches in my tree rather than look through whole MTD ML, find out which acks/reviewed-by to add and where, which patch versions are out of date, etc. At this point I think, that you have to use the l2 tree, because David's tree is very out-of-date. Also, beware that the l2 tree is currently in linux-next. -- Best Regards, Artem Bityutskiy