On Sun, Dec 14, 2014 at 10:17 AM, Paul E. McKenney <paul...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: > On Sun, Dec 14, 2014 at 09:41:04AM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote: >> On Sun, Dec 14, 2014 at 9:37 AM, Paul E. McKenney >> <paul...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: >> > On Sun, Dec 14, 2014 at 08:29:33AM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote: >> >> On Sun, Dec 14, 2014 at 4:03 AM, Paul E. McKenney >> >> <paul...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: >> >> > On Sat, Dec 13, 2014 at 11:26:36PM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote: >> >> >> On Dec 13, 2014 10:58 PM, "Stephen Rothwell" <s...@canb.auug.org.au> >> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Hi Andy, >> >> >> > >> >> >> > The luto-misc tree seems to have a whole series of commits in it that >> >> >> > have just bee removed from the rcu tree ... You really have to be >> >> >> > very >> >> >> > careful if you base your work on a tree that is regularly rebased. >> >> >> >> >> >> Hmm. They were there a couple days ago. Paul, what should I do about >> >> >> this? I only need the one NMI nesting change for the stuff in >> >> >> luto/next. >> >> >> >> >> >> > I also wonder if the other commits in that tree are destined for >> >> >> > v3.19? If they are for v3.20, then they should not be in linux-next >> >> >> > until after v3.19-rc1 has been released. >> >> >> >> >> >> They're for 3.20. I'll drop the whole series from the next branch for >> >> >> now. >> >> > >> >> > You mean the NMI nesting change below, correct? One approach would be >> >> > to include the branch rcu/dev from my -rcu tree. Would that work for >> >> > you? >> >> >> >> That would work. >> >> >> >> The problem is that, if you rebase again and I don't notice, then >> >> it'll generate a pile of conflicts. Is there someway that I can flag >> >> my next tree as depending on a certain commi existing in another tree >> >> so that the scripts that generate linux-next will ignore it if the >> >> base commit goes away? >> > >> > The commits would still stick around because I keep date-encoded branches. >> > But just to make things easier, I created a andy.2014.11.21a branch that >> > points to the current commit and will stay there. Please let me know how >> > it goes. >> >> That's the same commit that's in rcu/dev and was in luto/next, I >> think. Is the issue just that you pulled the whole thing from >> whichever linux-rcu branch is in -next, but I still had it, so it >> caused a problem? > > I still have the commit. All I did was move the rcu/next branch that > Stephen pulls from. > >> In any case, I'll wait for 3.19-rc1 before re-adding any of this. > > That does sound simpler, as I will make this commit available to -next > at that point. ;-) >
I'm re-adding the branch, since 3.19-rc1 is out, the change appears to still exist as-is in your tree, and it merges cleanly and builds in the latest -next for me. Let me know if this will be problematic for any reason. Thanks, Andy > Thanx, Paul > -- Andy Lutomirski AMA Capital Management, LLC -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
