From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Fengguang Wu <wfg@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: =?utf-8?Q?drivers=2Fblock=2Fcpqarray?=
 =?utf-8?Q?=2Ec=3A938=3A2=3A_error=3A_too_many_arguments_to_function_?=
 =?utf-8?B?5oW0bGtfcnFfbWFwX3Nn77+9?=
Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2012 17:25:19 +0800
Message-ID: <20120614092519.GA12482@localhost>
References: <4fd91c3f.KAwMcygw9fFGn9Cx%wfg@linux.intel.com>
 <4FD984F3.3070502@kernel.dk>
 <20120614090151.GA12013@localhost>
 <4FD9A95D.40903@kernel.dk>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Return-path: <linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4FD9A95D.40903@kernel.dk>
Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org
To: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Cc: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, "git@vger.kernel.org" <git@vger.kernel.org>
List-Id: linux-raid.ids

On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 11:05:33AM +0200, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 06/14/2012 11:01 AM, Fengguang Wu wrote:
> > Hi Jens,
> > 
> > On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 08:30:11AM +0200, Jens Axboe wrote:
> >> On 06/14/2012 01:03 AM, wfg@linux.intel.com wrote:
> >>> FYI, kernel build failed on
> >>>
> >>> tree:   git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/axboe/linux-block.git multiqueue
> >>> head:   e9a6aa8a0b7b93195774a9fcf551632bf3abcd97
> >>> commit: 67db7275fa4325d46853a4bfcb79acf32e48eca8 [1/3] multiqueue: a hodge podge of things
> >>
> >> The multiqueue branch is a private branch, it's known broken on many
> >> configs at the moment.
> > 
> > OK. Sorry my script just blindly build tests every new/updated branches
> > in the tree. It does try to reduce noise level by remembering all warned
> > error messages. However if it still presents a problem to the private
> > branches, I can either explicitly blacklist "multiqueue", or let the
> > script automatically skip commits whose "^Signed-off-by:" is still missing.
> 
> It's not a problem that you're building various branches, as long as you
> are expecting a bit of noise :-). In fact I applaud your effort on
> expanding the scope of building others branches.

Thank you :-)

> But it does raise the question of how do we best signal intermediate
> branches like this, so they can be avoided until they are ready. The
> blacklist doesn't seem like a great choice, since then I have to
> remember to remind you when it _is_ ok to build it.
> 
> How about some arbitrary tag? Instead of checking a Signed-off-by, I
> could just add a Dont-Auto-Build or something like that. What do you
> think?

Anything convenient to you would be fine.

If we can somehow tag the whole branch, it would be most convenient.
Git can add description to a branch with

        git branch --edit-description [branch name]

However I don't know how to retrieve that description on a remote
branch..

Thanks,
Fengguang