From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Cc: Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the tiny tree with the tip tree
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2014 07:43:28 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140923054328.GA28790@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140923143232.5ffff46e@canb.auug.org.au>
* Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> Hi Josh,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the tiny tree got conflicts in
> arch/x86/kernel/process_32.c and arch/x86/kernel/process_64.c between
> commits dc56c0f9b870 ("x86, fpu: Shift "fpu_counter = 0" from
> copy_thread() to arch_dup_task_struct()") and 6f46b3aef003 ("x86:
> copy_thread: Don't nullify ->ptrace_bps twice") from the tip tree and
> commits a1cf09f93e66 ("x86: process: Unify 32-bit and 64-bit
> copy_thread I/O bitmap handling") and e4a191d1e05b ("x86: Support
> compiling out userspace I/O (iopl and ioperm)") from the tiny tree.
Why are such changes in the 'tiny' tree? These are sensitive
arch/x86 files, and any unification and compilation-out support
patches need to go through the proper review channels and be
merged upstream via the x86 tree if accepted...
In particular the graticious sprinking of #ifdef
CONFIG_X86_IOPORTs around x86 code looks ugly.
Josh, don't do that, this route is really unacceptable. Please
resubmit the latest patches and remove these from linux-next.
Thanks,
Ingo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-09-23 5:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-09-23 4:32 linux-next: manual merge of the tiny tree with the tip tree Stephen Rothwell
2014-09-23 5:43 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2014-09-23 6:21 ` Josh Triplett
2014-09-23 8:36 ` Ingo Molnar
2014-10-29 15:52 ` Josh Triplett
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2014-11-25 6:03 Stephen Rothwell
2014-11-25 6:16 ` Ingo Molnar
2014-11-25 6:30 ` John Stultz
2014-11-25 7:20 ` Josh Triplett
2014-11-25 6:48 ` Josh Triplett
2014-11-25 10:10 ` Ingo Molnar
2014-11-26 0:04 ` josh
2014-12-08 11:09 ` Ingo Molnar
2014-09-26 6:45 Stephen Rothwell
2014-09-23 4:23 Stephen Rothwell
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20140923054328.GA28790@gmail.com \
--to=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-next@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).