Re: Re: [PATCH 0/3] xen: Use PM/Hibernate events for save/restore/chkpt

["Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>]

On Friday, February 25, 2011, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Feb 2011, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > I believe it only "[PATCH 3/3] PM: pm.h - Add comments about Xen save/restore/chkpt use case"
> > > 
> > > (http://marc.info/?i=1298157158-5421-4-git-send-email-rshriram@cs.ubc.ca)
> > 
> > This particular one should go in _after_ the functional patches.
> > 
> > > I or Stefano (these patches are against Ian's tree which is againsts Stefano's
> > > tree) can take the other patches and stick Pavel's Ack, Rafeal's Ack, Ian's Ack
> > > on them and also my Signed-off for the Xen bits.
> > > 
> > > I think that would work?
> > 
> > In fact, I think it's better if all patches go through the Xen tree.
> > 
>  
> I don't mind taking them but if they have to go after your
> suspend-2.6/linux-next tree this would introduce a new dependency in the
> branch I am preparing for linux-next myself.
> 
> Should I pull your suspend-2.6/linux-next tree into my linux-next branch?
> Considering that this could create conflicts in linux-next if you
> force-push your tree with some new changes and I don't update my version
> of it, maybe it is better if I pull only a reduced version of it with
> just the strict dependencies?

It's not that simple, I think you'd need to pull my entire linux-next branch
because of the dependencies between commits in there.

Alternatively, I can take the entire $subject patchset.

Still, I'd like the discussion to settle before anyway.

Thanks,
Rafael