From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:49865) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VGt06-0005AR-GM for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 03 Sep 2013 11:58:47 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VGt01-00041B-Fv for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 03 Sep 2013 11:58:42 -0400 Message-ID: <1378223912.3246.36.camel@ul30vt.home> From: Alex Williamson Date: Tue, 03 Sep 2013 09:58:32 -0600 In-Reply-To: <5226048E.2090004@ozlabs.ru> References: <1378196857-27541-1-git-send-email-aik@ozlabs.ru> <5225AC9A.2090601@ozlabs.ru> <5225BD32.8030001@siemens.com> <52260025.3050704@ozlabs.ru> <5226048E.2090004@ozlabs.ru> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] linux-headers: update to 3.11 List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Alexey Kardashevskiy Cc: Peter Maydell , kvm-devel , Gleb Natapov , QEMU Trivial , Jan Kiszka , Michael Tokarev , QEMU Developers , Paolo Bonzini On Wed, 2013-09-04 at 01:47 +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote: > On 09/04/2013 01:34 AM, Peter Maydell wrote: > > On 3 September 2013 16:28, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote: > >> On 09/03/2013 08:42 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote: > >>> This shouldn't be routed through trivial in general as things broke too > >>> often in this area. > >> > >> > >> Sorry for my ignorance, but this is The Kernel, it is already there, broken > >> or not, even if it is broken, qemu cannot stay isolated, no? > >> This is a mechanical change, no more. > > > > The classic way for things to break is that a header > > update accidentally reverts something (because a > > previous update was from kvm-next and this one is > > from mainline, for example). Accidental updates against > > a kernel which is neither kvm-next nor mainline are > > the other common "broken" version of a header update > > patch. > > I can understand that but this update is a mainline kernel update and it is > not an accidental one but very specific :-/ I was under the impression that we were only ever updating linux-headers from mainline, never from kvm-next. Therefore any mainline tag should be a reasonable re-base target. Thanks, Alex