lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Jul]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    SubjectRe: linux-next: manual merge of the staging tree with the target-merge tree
    From
    Date
    On Mon, 2012-07-23 at 08:16 -0700, Greg KH wrote:
    > On Sun, Jul 22, 2012 at 02:44:23PM -0700, Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote:
    > > So Linus has merged target-pending/for-next this afternoon, so now we
    > > are just waiting on net-next to hit mainline with the vhost patches
    > > already ACK'ed by MST. Hopefully that makes things easier for you to
    > > considering taking tcm_vhost upstream via staging. ;)
    > >
    > > Also, MST asked for an RFC-v5 for the initial merge commit with some
    > > minor debug wrapper changes that will be going out next week. This will
    > > include a move into drivers/staging/tcm_vhost/ against a rebased
    > > staging.git patch with the necessary -rc0 mainline dependencies.
    > >
    > > Please let me know if your OK with this, otherwise I'll just plan to
    > > keep -v5 against target-pending/for-next-merge for now, and send a GIT
    > > PULL after MST gets back from holiday on the 29th -> 30th.
    >
    > I have no idea what any of the above three paragraphs are asking for, or
    > talking about, sorry.
    >
    > Note, the merge window is closed for taking new stuff into the staging
    > tree. If it isn't already in my staging-next tree, it isn't going to go
    > into 3.6 unless it's bug fixes, sorry.

    In that case, I'll just keep tcm_vhost in drivers/vhost/ for now and
    await MST's return to determine if he's willing to ACK this round (via
    target-pending) for an initial merge.

    > How about we figure all of this
    > out after 3.6-rc1 is out so we can understand what is going on for 3.7?
    >

    I'd like to try to avoid slipping to v3.7 if possible, as we'll have the
    necessary dependencies in mainline over the next days once net-next is
    merged. It's also self-contained driver that does not effect existing
    code (aside from what's already been ACK'ed), so risk is very low..

    --nab



    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2012-07-23 22:41    [W:0.024 / U:0.224 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site