From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the tiny tree with the tip tree Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2014 07:43:28 +0200 Message-ID: <20140923054328.GA28790@gmail.com> References: <20140923143232.5ffff46e@canb.auug.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mail-wg0-f52.google.com ([74.125.82.52]:62447 "EHLO mail-wg0-f52.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753189AbaIWFne (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Sep 2014 01:43:34 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20140923143232.5ffff46e@canb.auug.org.au> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Stephen Rothwell Cc: Josh Triplett , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , "H. Peter Anvin" , Peter Zijlstra , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Oleg Nesterov * Stephen Rothwell 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