Messages in this thread | | | Subject | RE: [PATCH 2.6.27-rc5 1/29] mdb: export ioapic read routines and detected ioapic count | Date | Mon, 1 Sep 2008 10:25:11 -0400 | From | "Halevy, Benny" <> |
| |
Cool. If you find git-send-email too low-level, feel free to use my convenience script, git-send-patch: http://git.bhalevy.com/git/gitweb.cgi?p=git-tools.git;a=blob_plain;f=git-send-patch;hb=HEAD that helps automate the patch sending process even further in particular it knows to wait between each email so that they arrive to the list (approx.) in order. (Otherwise I found that Thundermail might get confused when trying to thread them together) Note: don't forget to keep the angle brackets surrounding the message-id for the in-reply-to parmaeter...
Benny
-----Original Message----- From: jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com [mailto:jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com] Sent: Mon 2008-09-01 16:39 To: Halevy, Benny Cc: jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2.6.27-rc5 1/29] mdb: export ioapic read routines and detected ioapic count > Jeff, general comment: can you please send your patches as replies > to a leading message so they all be linked as a single thread? > Threading them together is helpful for maintaining several > versions of your patchset and it's simpler to ignore if one's > not really interested in this topic at all. > > Benny >
Hi Benny,
I was already scolded about this by a few folks. I had not located the git email programs when I submitted this project and I wrote something myself to submit them. (see attached). I have thrown the program in the trash I wrote to do this and moved to git.
Now I have reviewed the git clients and patch tools and I understand and will use git and I see now why git works this way with the reply chain. I will not be submitting patch series on this list for every release unless the code has had major additions or changes in the future. I will instead post the patches to the project site with a single post on this list to point to the patches.
I will post patch series when x86_64 is finished and I have completed my rewrite of traps_32.c and traps_64.c -- Linux needs nested TSS gates over all the exceptions so the system can handle nested exceptions and switch to a known good stack during faults. At present, what's there is ok but not as resilient as it could be.
Jeff
#include <unistd.h> #include <stdio.h> #include <string.h>
#define TESTING 1
unsigned char buffer[8192]; unsigned char filename[64];
int output_comments(FILE *fl, int j) { fprintf(fl, "\n"); return 0; }
int main(int argc, char *argv[]) { register int i = 1, j; register FILE *fp = NULL, *fl, *fs; char *s, *p;
while (s = fgets(buffer, 8192, stdin)) { if (!strncmp(s, "diff", 4)) continue;
if (!strncmp(s, "---", 3)) { if (fp) { i++; fclose(fp); }
sprintf(filename, "%i.patch", i); fp = fopen(filename, "wb"); if (!fp) { printf("file open error [%s]\n", filename); return 1; }
p = strchr(s, '/'); if (p) { fprintf(fp, "--- a"); fprintf(fp, "%s", p); } else fprintf(fp, "%s", s); continue; }
if (!strncmp(s, "+++", 3)) { p = strchr(s, '/'); if (p) { fprintf(fp, "+++ b"); fprintf(fp, "%s", p); } else fprintf(fp, "%s", s); continue; }
if (fp); fprintf(fp, "%s", s); } if (fp) fclose(fp);
fs = fopen("mailer", "wb"); if (!fs) { printf("file open error [mailer]\n"); return 1; }
for (j=1; j <= i; j++) { sprintf(filename, "%i.patch", j); fp = fopen(filename, "rb"); if (!fp) { printf("file open error [%s]\n", filename); return 1; }
sprintf(filename, "%i.final", j); fl = fopen(filename, "wb"); if (!fl) { printf("file open error [%s]\n", filename); return 1; } fprintf(fs, "sendmail -f jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com -t < %s\n", filename);
#if TESTING fprintf(fl, "To:jeff@wolfmountaingroup.com\n"); #else fprintf(fl, "To:linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org\n"); #endif fprintf(fl, "From:jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com\n"); fprintf(fl, "Subject:[PATCH %s %i/%i] mdb: ", argv[1] ? argv[1] : "", j, i);
output_comments(fl, j);
fprintf(fl, "Signed-off-by: Jeffrey Vernon Merkey " "(jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com)\n\n");
while (s = fgets(buffer, 8192, fp)) fprintf(fl, "%s", s);
fclose(fp); sprintf(filename, "%i.patch", j); unlink(filename);
fclose(fl); } fclose(fs); chmod("mailer", 755); return 0; }
| |