lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Feb]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: Announce: Linux-next (Or Andrew's dream :-))
    On Fri, 15 Feb 2008 15:37:32 -0800 Andrew Morton wrote:

    > On Fri, 15 Feb 2008 23:23:08 +0000
    > Russell King <rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk> wrote:
    >
    > > On Tue, Feb 12, 2008 at 12:48:13PM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
    > > > I have tried, and successfully done this many times in the past. The
    > > > kobject change was one example: add a new function, migrate all users of
    > > > a direct pointer over to that function, after that work is all done and
    > > > in, change the structure and do the needed work afterward. All is
    > > > bisectable completly, with no big "flag day" needed.
    > >
    > > Incorrect - because this all happened far too quickly. This is one of
    > > the reasons that I ended up having to redo various parts of the ARM tree
    > > because stuff broke - set_kset_name() completely vanished introducing
    > > compile errors, and iirc some merge issues as well.
    > >
    > > I had patches introducing new system objects which use that, and
    > > modifications extremely close to other uses in the PXA code.
    > >
    > > The end result (through rebuilding the affected parts of my git tree, and
    > > asking people for replacement patches) was something that is bisectable -
    > > but had I tried to merge stuff as is, it would've been an utter mess, and
    > > _was_ unbuildable.
    > >
    >
    > I wonder why I didn't see any of this - I build arm allmodconfig at least
    > once a week, usually more frequently.
    >
    > So either the offending patches weren't in my pile or arm allmodconfig is
    > worse than I thought :(
    >
    > It really is in arch maintainers' best interest to keep their allmodconfig
    > in good shape, for this reason. arm's _isn't_ in good shape: the compile
    > fails for several long-standing reasons (eg: no hope of building DRM) and I
    > don't think the coverage is very broad either.

    I think that Russell has said that allmodconfig isn't very realistic
    for ARM, with its 70+ config files. Nevertheless, having a usable
    allmodconfig would be very helpful.

    ---
    ~Randy


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2008-02-16 00:51    [W:0.041 / U:60.348 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site