lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2023]   [Jul]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: Upcoming nolibc pull request for the next merge window
From
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




\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2023-07-24 16:50    [W:0.066 / U:0.192 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site