From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:33678) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gfL0P-0007wC-DD for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 04 Jan 2019 03:39:02 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gfL0K-0004D5-UP for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 04 Jan 2019 03:39:01 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:38416) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gfL0K-0004BZ-Os for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 04 Jan 2019 03:38:56 -0500 Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2019 09:38:50 +0100 From: Cornelia Huck Message-ID: <20190104093850.043738c7.cohuck@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <714a115f-835b-0041-426b-d16f9439ebc1@redhat.com> References: <20190103175113.18196-1-pbonzini@redhat.com> <20190103130406-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <714a115f-835b-0041-426b-d16f9439ebc1@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] include: update Linux headers to 4.21/5.0 List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Paolo Bonzini Cc: Peter Maydell , "Michael S. Tsirkin" , QEMU Developers On Fri, 4 Jan 2019 09:07:23 +0100 Paolo Bonzini wrote: > On 03/01/19 20:26, Peter Maydell wrote: > > On Thu, 3 Jan 2019 at 18:19, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > >> I'd prefer the shell script part and the new vhost_types header which > >> are actually reviewable to be split out to a separate patch. > > > > I agree that shell script changes should be their own patch. > > My view is that a header-update commit should be entirely > > and nothing but the automatically generated results of > > running scripts/update-linux-headers.sh, with a commit > > message that says "Generated by running update-linux-headers.sh > > on upstream kernel commit xxxx". > > The problem with this approach is that the old script does not work with > the new commit and the new script does not work with the old commit. > Doing the update in the same commit as the script update means that it's > clear from the commit message on which Linux commit you should run it > (though in this case I should have specified 4.21-rc1 or 5.0-rc1). In this case, just note that in the change log? I'd prefer to do it in a single commit if there are dependencies. > Another way would be to make Linux a submodule. Then you'd upgrade the > submodule and the script in one commit, and then generate the headers at > compile-time or release-time. This however wouldn't be as nice for > users of the git repo. That's the reason why I went for the single > commit, but of course I can split it and will in v2. TBH: Just say no to that submodule idea :) The need to adapt the script is rare enough for a simple note in the change log to be sufficient if the change can't be split out.