lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Dec]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH 00/86] PATA fixes
    Date
    On Thursday 03 December 2009 09:11:19 pm Jeff Garzik wrote:
    > On 12/03/2009 02:45 PM, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
    > > On Thursday 03 December 2009 06:53:59 pm Jeff Garzik wrote:
    > >> On 12/03/2009 07:39 AM, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
    > >>> On Thursday 03 December 2009 09:07:41 am Jeff Garzik wrote:
    > >>>> The merge window is upon us, which by strict rules means that anything
    > >>>> not already in libata-dev.git#upstream needs to wait until 2.6.34.
    > >>>>
    > >>>> However, bug fixes and the like should definitely be in 2.6.33.
    > >>>> ->init_host is definitely 2.6.34 material. Some of the other stuff
    > >>>> could go either way.
    > >>
    > >>> If you would like to apply some of my patches to 2.6.33 you are more than
    > >>> welcome to do it. I can even prepare separate git tree with specific changes
    > >>> to make it easier for you once you tell me which changes you would like to
    > >>> see in it.
    > >>
    > >> OK, great.
    > >>
    > >> Can you prepare a patchset containing only fixes? Comment-only changes
    > >> are acceptable too. Trivial changes too, if they are extremely trivial :)
    > >>
    > >> Include nothing that adds features, removes or unifies drivers, etc.
    > >
    > > Since this is pretty high-level description and some changes fall into
    > > many categories at once (i.e. addition of proper PCI Power Management
    > > handling could be considered both as a fix and as a feature) I prepared
    > > a rather conservative set of changes (which means that unfortunately
    > > it misses many enhancements available in my tree):
    > >
    > >> Please do it in standard kernel submit form, which is either
    > >> (a) repost the patches (yes, again) being submitted for 2.6.33, or
    > >> (b) a standard git pull request, which includes shortlog, diffstat, and
    > >> all-in-one diff.
    > >
    > > Thank you for the detailed explanation of the standard kernel submit
    > > form (I wonder how would I know this otherwise :) but the thing is that
    > > at the current moment I'm not submitting anything to the upstream.
    >
    > Ok, that explains my confusion, then. I had thought you intended to get
    > this stuff upstream, and into users' hands.

    Interesting argument but the vast majority of users use distribution kernels
    which are not upstream and I doubt that any self-respecting distribution would
    miss such amount of fixes.

    The rest can easily use my tree which follows upstream closely and can be
    obtained using a single line git command.

    > > That's it. While this may sound strange to some people it turns out
    > > that in practice it is much less hassle for me personally to keep some
    > > of trees outside of the (sometimes greatly overrated) upstream.
    > >
    > > If knowing the above you still would like to include the aforementioned
    > > set of changes in your libata-dev tree they are at kernel.org now.
    >
    > I will go through this batch and cherry-pick. The build fix is already
    > in my tree. Existing kernel practice (and previous comments) indicate
    > that lists of known issues do not belong in Kconfig. Will take a look
    > at the other stuff...

    Well, you were aware that they were not dropped so you could have easily told
    me that you specifically don't want this patches in the for-2.6.33 tree..

    --
    Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2009-12-03 21:31    [W:0.027 / U:147.680 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site