From: Russell King <rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Cc: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org>,
linux-next@vger.kernel.org, Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org>,
Wolfram Sang <w.sang@pengutronix.de>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the i2c tree with the arm-current tree
Date: Wed, 6 May 2009 08:15:48 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090506071547.GA29466@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090506131031.83f1b04d.sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
On Wed, May 06, 2009 at 01:10:31PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Jean,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the i2c tree got a conflict in
> arch/arm/configs/kirkwood_defconfig arch/arm/configs/mv78xx0_defconfig
> arch/arm/configs/orion5x_defconfig between various commits from the
> arm-current tree and commit c637675d24618d8e0afe344096a1ad96986c4f50
> ("i2c/chips: Move max6875 to drivers/misc/eeprom") from the i2c tree.
Since defconfig updates are always going to create lots of noise, and
the files are normally out of date, the *only* sensible way to handle
updates is to have one tree dealing with them per architecture.
Spreading them across multiple trees and then expecting merges to sort
out the resulting mess is unreasonable; they just change far too much
when updates happen. Moreover, defconfig updates should be in their
own separate commit and not combined with other changes.
--
Russell King
Linux kernel 2.6 ARM Linux - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/
maintainer of:
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-05-06 7:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-05-06 3:10 linux-next: manual merge of the i2c tree with the arm-current tree Stephen Rothwell
2009-05-06 7:15 ` Russell King [this message]
2009-05-06 7:25 ` Jean Delvare
2009-05-06 19:01 ` Russell King
2009-05-07 6:54 ` Jean Delvare
2009-05-06 8:31 ` Jean Delvare
2009-05-06 19:04 ` Russell King
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=20090506071547.GA29466@flint.arm.linux.org.uk \
--to=rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk \
--cc=khali@linux-fr.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-next@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nico@cam.org \
--cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
--cc=w.sang@pengutronix.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