From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751729AbaLNRhY (ORCPT ); Sun, 14 Dec 2014 12:37:24 -0500 Received: from e35.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.153]:38949 "EHLO e35.co.us.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751104AbaLNRhW (ORCPT ); Sun, 14 Dec 2014 12:37:22 -0500 Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2014 09:37:15 -0800 From: "Paul E. McKenney" To: Andy Lutomirski Cc: Stephen Rothwell , "linux-next@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: linux-next: question about the luto-misc tree Message-ID: <20141214173715.GB5310@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Reply-To: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com References: <20141214175747.2e6c506e@canb.auug.org.au> <20141214120318.GA5310@linux.vnet.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-TM-AS-MML: disable X-Content-Scanned: Fidelis XPS MAILER x-cbid: 14121417-0013-0000-0000-0000070F4BAC Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Dec 14, 2014 at 08:29:33AM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > On Sun, Dec 14, 2014 at 4:03 AM, Paul E. McKenney > wrote: > > On Sat, Dec 13, 2014 at 11:26:36PM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > >> On Dec 13, 2014 10:58 PM, "Stephen Rothwell" wrote: > >> > > >> > Hi Andy, > >> > > >> > The luto-misc tree seems to have a whole series of commits in it that > >> > have just bee removed from the rcu tree ... You really have to be very > >> > careful if you base your work on a tree that is regularly rebased. > >> > >> Hmm. They were there a couple days ago. Paul, what should I do about > >> this? I only need the one NMI nesting change for the stuff in > >> luto/next. > >> > >> > I also wonder if the other commits in that tree are destined for > >> > v3.19? If they are for v3.20, then they should not be in linux-next > >> > until after v3.19-rc1 has been released. > >> > >> They're for 3.20. I'll drop the whole series from the next branch for now. > > > > You mean the NMI nesting change below, correct? One approach would be > > to include the branch rcu/dev from my -rcu tree. Would that work for you? > > That would work. > > The problem is that, if you rebase again and I don't notice, then > it'll generate a pile of conflicts. Is there someway that I can flag > my next tree as depending on a certain commi existing in another tree > so that the scripts that generate linux-next will ignore it if the > base commit goes away? The commits would still stick around because I keep date-encoded branches. But just to make things easier, I created a andy.2014.11.21a branch that points to the current commit and will stay there. Please let me know how it goes. Thanx, Paul