Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 9 Oct 2023 06:54:04 -0700 | From | "Paul E. McKenney" <> | Subject | Re: nolibc changes since 6.6-rc1 for linux-next |
| |
On Mon, Oct 09, 2023 at 09:22:59AM +0200, Thomas Weißschuh wrote: > Hi Willy, Paul, > > On 2023-10-09 08:53:58+0200, Willy Tarreau wrote: > > On Sun, Oct 08, 2023 at 09:27:43AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > (...) > > > The other approach involves rebasing the "nolibc/next" stack > > > on top of the "nolibc/fixes" stack. > > > > That was my initial expectation as well, it's much easier, preserves > > the patches ordering so it guarantees that all fixes are always present > > in -next and that there won't be conflicts when they're finally submitted. > > The workflow Paul described indeed makes a lot of sense. > > I can redo it this afternoon. > > > [..] > > > > While in the area, would the following (absolutely not urgent or even > > > particularly important) patch be a good idea? This gets rid of a line > > > of noise from "git status" after running the tests. > > > > Good idea, feel free to propose a patch ;-) > > How about directly folding it into the original patch? > I can take care of that later today, too.
Works for me, and thank you!
Thanx, Paul
| |