From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756223AbZFATuF (ORCPT ); Mon, 1 Jun 2009 15:50:05 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754241AbZFATtz (ORCPT ); Mon, 1 Jun 2009 15:49:55 -0400 Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:47238 "EHLO mx2.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753456AbZFATty (ORCPT ); Mon, 1 Jun 2009 15:49:54 -0400 Message-ID: <4A2430A4.1080908@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 01 Jun 2009 22:48:52 +0300 From: Avi Kivity User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (X11/20090320) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Steven Rostedt CC: Jaswinder Singh Rajput , =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Christi?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?an_Borntr=E4ger?= , Ingo Molnar , LKML , KVM list Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: add localversion to avoid confusion and conflicts References: <1243581494.3212.1.camel@localhost.localdomain> <200905290948.34482.borntraeger@de.ibm.com> <1243586626.4379.15.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090601192624.GA32428@goodmis.org> In-Reply-To: <20090601192624.GA32428@goodmis.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Steven Rostedt wrote: > >> This patch is only for KVM tree and not for linus tree. >> >> Lets assume 100 developers are working on kvm tree and they use kvm tree >> on 2 PCs. So count becomes 200. >> >> Like in my case I have dozen of kernel trees so I keep on swapping >> config between kernels. And I also need to test config from various >> users. So this count is countless. >> I think this is the biggest point for adding localversion in -tip. >> It seems Ingo is busy in perfcounter stuff otherwise he will explain you >> more advantages. >> >> In the least case, Can you differentiate between 1 and 200 ? >> >> So by adding this patch we can save lot of developer's time. >> > > No this patch wastes a lot of developers time. If we accept it, than any > patch that is added after it will need to be rebased before going to > Linus. Unless KVM is made up of a bunch of branches like tip is, this will become > more of a hassle than a benefit. > kvm.git for-linus branches are rebased anyway, since I fold patches that fix or revert other patches. I also (rarely) delay some patches in my tree but submit others that came later. localversion would show up in linux-next, not sure if that's a problem. On the other hand, I'm not sure what it's worth. -- I have a truly marvellous patch that fixes the bug which this signature is too narrow to contain.