Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 24 Jul 2023 08:49:40 -0600 | Subject | Re: Upcoming nolibc pull request for the next merge window | From | Shuah Khan <> |
| |
On 7/21/23 22:48, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Sat, Jul 22, 2023 at 01:01:20PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote: >> Hi Paul, >> >> On Fri, 21 Jul 2023 10:39:48 -0700 "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org> wrote: >>> >>> This is just to let you know that Willy and I are adding co-maintainers >>> for nolibc. Shuah Khan will join me as administrative maintainer, >>> and will be sending the pull request to you for the next merge window. >>> >>> Similarly, Thomas Weißschuh will be joining Willy as technical maintainer >>> for nolibc. With luck, this won't affect you, but in case you come across >>> a nolibc issue, please reach out to Thomas as well as Willy, Shuah, >>> and myself. There will of course be an update to the MAINTAINERS file >>> in the near future, but just to let you know in the meantime. >> >> Would it make sense to add a separate nolibc branch to linux-next (and >> no longer merge it into the rcu branch? Or are there dependencies >> between the two? > > Dependencies between nolibc and RCU are extremely rare, so it might well > make sense to have a separate branch. > > Maybe nolibc/next from either the -rcu tree or Shuah's tree? Shuah, > would something else work better for you? >
We probably have to add linux-kselftest nolibc and rcu nolibc since we are planning to alternating pull requests?
Paul, you and I have to make sure we don't have duplicate patches in our nolibc branches.
thanks, -- Shuah
| |