lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Oct]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: linux-next: manual merge of the msm tree with the arm tree
From
Date
On Tue, 2010-10-19 at 19:53 +0100, Russell King wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 11:42:37AM -0700, Daniel Walker wrote:
> >
> > > That's why on occasions we do transgress the established process to
> > > accommodate such changes. Imagine just for a moment the patch that
> > > modified the interrupt callback prototype to remove the useless pt_regs
> > > argument. Obviously, it had to be done atomically to the _whole_ tree,
> > > and it was agreed that this patch was to be applied at the end of the
> > > merge window. But no one expected a single minute sending a CC to _all_
> > > the driver authors.
> >
> > I don't actually know which patch your talking about, but it sounds
> > pretty simple.. I'm not really addressing really simple fixes, even tho
> > changing a single parameter on a function could be done broken up
> > depending on what it is.
>
> As you think that it's a simple matter, I challenge you to break this
> change up in a way that doesn't result in any build breakage:
> 7d12e780e003f93433d49ce78cfedf4b4c52adc5

I wasn't saying it's simple to break patches up. I was just saying the
patch sounded like something simple, like running sed over the source or
a change replace type patch.

I'll look at the patch you reference tho, maybe I can break it up.

Daniel



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2010-10-19 21:27    [W:0.123 / U:1.060 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site