From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Borislav Petkov Subject: Re: Rebasing the edac-amd tree (Was: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the edac-amd tree with Linus' tree) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 09:42:08 +0200 Message-ID: <20090805074208.GD7732@liondog.tnic> References: <20090805150933.103de233.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <20090805062215.GA7732@liondog.tnic> <20090805164032.3cf9d95a.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Return-path: Received: from mail-fx0-f217.google.com ([209.85.220.217]:64841 "EHLO mail-fx0-f217.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932937AbZHEHmO (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Aug 2009 03:42:14 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090805164032.3cf9d95a.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Stephen Rothwell Cc: Borislav Petkov , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar Hi, On Wed, Aug 05, 2009 at 04:40:32PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > On Wed, 5 Aug 2009 08:22:15 +0200 Borislav Petkov wrote: > > > > thanks and yes, you're right. The former patch is less intrusive > > and we opted for that one since it is really late in the -rc cycle > > but the latter cleans up stuff so that code flow becomes much more > > understandable. I'll rediff later and sorry for the inconvenience. > > As an alternative to rebasing, you could merge Linus' current tree into > yours and do the merge fixup there. This is not particularly necessary, > as the fixup is fairly simple. Though you may want to do that sometime > before you ask Linus to merge your tree. that's what I'd normally do but I'm carrying some more patches which have to go to -tip and I'd rather rebase to have a clean history and all. > > By the way, I see that you're merging edac-amd before tip and I'm going > > to need to rebase my tree against tip in the next couple of days since > > it depends on a bunch of stuff in it, so could you please switch the > > merge order of the two trees so that edac-amd goes after tip? > > Again, instead of rebasing, you could just merge in the branches from tip > that you depend on. You need to make sure that you only depend on stable > (i.e. non rebasing) branches in the tip tree, not on the branch > (auto-latest) that is actually merged into linux-next. Please discuss > this with Ingo. Yep, it happened yesterday. > > I will move the edac-amd tree to after the tip tree tomorrow. Thanks. -- Regards/Gruss, Boris.