From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753276AbaCLUVL (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Mar 2014 16:21:11 -0400 Received: from mail-qc0-f178.google.com ([209.85.216.178]:46604 "EHLO mail-qc0-f178.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753014AbaCLUVI (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Mar 2014 16:21:08 -0400 Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2014 16:21:02 -0400 From: Tejun Heo To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt Cc: Mark Brown , Greg KH , Stewart Smith , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the driver-core tree Message-ID: <20140312202102.GB22332@htj.dyndns.org> References: <20140312005152.9ac4063f65dbd233f5d50b4d@kernel.org> <20140312015021.GC10106@kroah.com> <1394596541.4840.70.camel@pasglop> <20140312113742.GM28112@sirena.org.uk> <1394654396.4840.94.camel@pasglop> <20140312200232.GA22332@htj.dyndns.org> <1394655292.4840.97.camel@pasglop> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1394655292.4840.97.camel@pasglop> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hello, On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 07:14:52AM +1100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > It's generally consider bad taste to pull entire trees into each > other :-) I know Stephen isn't fan of it... I wouldn't say it's considered "generally" bad taste. For one-off changes, maybe. This was a rather large restructuring of the whole thing, so actually duplicating all the rather significant commits would be a lot worse. > I'd rather have just that series (or even better, just the patches > introducing the new function) in a topic branch, itself pulled into > both driver-core-next and my tree. > > Can you produce that ? (I need a non-rebase guarantee though). It's a series of rather complex patches. I really don't think duplicating them is a good idea. We can either resurrect the old API to kill it again or set up a merge branch which I don't think is too unusual in situations like this. Thanks. -- tejun