From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759491AbYAYXL7 (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Jan 2008 18:11:59 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1758321AbYAYXLk (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Jan 2008 18:11:40 -0500 Received: from mtagate5.uk.ibm.com ([195.212.29.138]:45285 "EHLO mtagate5.uk.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757965AbYAYXLi (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Jan 2008 18:11:38 -0500 Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2008 00:11:33 +0100 From: Heiko Carstens To: Greg KH Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Kay Sievers , Michael Holzheu , Volker Sameske , Cornelia Huck Subject: Re: [PATCH 085/196] kset: convert s390 ipl.c to use kset_create Message-ID: <20080125231017.GA20351@osiris.ibm.com> References: <20080125071127.GA4860@kroah.com> <1201246425-5058-6-git-send-email-gregkh@suse.de> <20080125122052.GA9080@osiris.ibm.com> <20080125174858.GB4242@suse.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080125174858.GB4242@suse.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.16 (2007-06-09) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jan 25, 2008 at 09:48:58AM -0800, Greg KH wrote: > On Fri, Jan 25, 2008 at 01:20:53PM +0100, Heiko Carstens wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 24, 2008 at 11:31:54PM -0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > > Dynamically create the kset instead of declaring it statically. > > > This makes the kobject attributes now work properly that I broke in the > > > previous patch. > > > > Could you please merge this and the previous patch before it goes > > upstream? Having an intermediate state where things are broken > > will cause pain and additional work in case of bisecting. > > It will not cause a build error (see the previous patch for details.) > The sysfs files will not properly show the correct data, that is all. > > The odds that you will hit this in a 'git bisect' is VERY low, and the > previous patch states that the files are now broken, so there should not > be any confusion regarding any user that might run across this. The odds are very low, as long as not more patch sets come up which introduce intermediate broken kernels. What exactly is the advantage of breaking the kernel with patch 1 and then fix it again with patch 2 instead of doing the straight forward conversions all with one patch?