lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Mar]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [GIT PULL] Kselftest updates for 3.20-rc1
From
Date
On Mon, 2015-03-02 at 16:19 -0500, Dave Jones wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 02:16:05PM +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote:
>
> > > On 02/09/2015 05:43 PM, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> > > > On Mon, 2015-02-09 at 17:36 -0700, Shuah Khan wrote:
> > > >> On 02/09/2015 05:30 PM, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> > > >>> On Mon, 2015-02-09 at 11:36 -0700, Shuah Khan wrote:
> > > >>>> Hi Linus,
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Please pull the following Kselftest updates for 3.20-rc1
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> thanks,
> > > >>>> -- Shuah
> > > >>>>
> > > >>> ...
> > > >>>
> > > >>> I don't understand why you insist on merging this series with the logic copied
> > > >>> 18 times.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> I'm happy to tweak my series that uses an include file, but I don't see the
> > > >>> point of merging this series first when almost every line will be removed when
> > > >>> my series goes in.
> > > >>
> > > >> Please work on the suggestions I made and rework the patches
> > > >> and resend. As I mentioned earlier, I want to enable this work
> > > >> and them make improvements.
> > > >
> > > > Yes I would like install to work to. I'd also like it to work for the powerpc
> > > > tests you ignored. But I don't want it to involve copying the same logic into
> > > > every Makefile in the tree.
> > >
> > > > My series was sent over a month ago, with plenty of time for you to merge it
> > > > instead of this cut-and-paste solution.
> > >
> > > I asked you to re-work the patches based on my suggestions
> > > and resend. I didn't see any patches from you that addressed
> > > the comments. I can't merge the patches you sent without
> > > addressing the comments.
> >
> > Your comments were "please rebase on my series", and as I explained that is
> > pointless because my series replaces your series.
>
> Michael's series also has a bunch of features this pull doesn't.
> I had started implementing some of these features myself before realizing
> this stuff was in limbo. (Especially the ability to install to a
> different directory: our use case involves packaging up the latest
> selftests for use to be run against a long-term stable kernel).
>
> What needs to happen to unblock this, given that nothing has been
> merged so far.
>
> Working on selftests is sort of frustrating with all this stuff pending
> given the potential conflicts.

Thanks for chiming in Dave, and sorry that this has gotten into such a mess.

I'll post a rebased version of my series and we can discuss the merits of each
approach.

cheers




\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-03-03 02:01    [W:3.683 / U:0.080 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site