From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754112AbYG3TTz (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Jul 2008 15:19:55 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753153AbYG3TTr (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Jul 2008 15:19:47 -0400 Received: from mx2.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.151.9]:58795 "EHLO mx2.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753148AbYG3TTq (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Jul 2008 15:19:46 -0400 Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2008 21:19:07 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: Sam Ravnborg Cc: Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , "H. Peter Anvin" , LKML , Jeff Dike , Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] x86: use arch/x86/include Message-ID: <20080730191907.GD26389@elte.hu> References: <20080730124952.GA23413@uranus.ravnborg.org> <20080730180411.GA7896@elte.hu> <20080730184700.GA29710@uranus.ravnborg.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080730184700.GA29710@uranus.ravnborg.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-ELTE-VirusStatus: clean X-ELTE-SpamScore: -1.5 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-1.5 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.2.3 -1.5 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Sam Ravnborg wrote: > > hm, we have a _ton_ of changes to include files queued up already, > > so this is rather inconvenient. > > git should cope with this if changes come in via git. I do not know > about "git am" applied patches. the pending commits are ordinary commits and there's little difference between a leaf commit that came via git and one that came via emails. (the difference between Git and email is for more complex ops like renames, merges - i.e. more abstract and multi-commit operations.) But such more complex scenarios are not what i'm talking about. We've got this many leaf commits in include/asm-x86/ at the moment: 308 files changed, 3025 insertions(+), 2025 deletions(-) ... and pulling your rename generates almost 50 conflicts. (Also, i've got to hunt down all scripts that somehow rely on the location on include/asm-x86.) > > I missed the discussion on this, what's the point of renaming all > > these files? > > It has been discussed many times to keep arch and arch include files > under arch/. > Lately Linus outlined this: > > http://kerneltrap.org/mailarchive/linux-kernel/2008/5/21/1903924 > > I took the ball and did the kbuild side of this so we could do this > gradually. > > sparc are already converted. sh has it ready to be pulled and others > are playing with it. > > How we do it in the best way for such a fragile codebase as x86 is I > am not sure. [...] huh, fragile codebase? Is that a flamebait? :-) What do you mean exactly? The timing problems come from the fact that 90% of Linux development and 95% of Linux testing happens on x86. So we've already got a ton of stuff queued up for the next merge window. (and some cleanups for this cycle as well) But fortunately you've scripted all this, so i guess we can do it at any stage. Could you send the script we should run? Ingo