Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752856Ab3JZOCc (ORCPT ); Sat, 26 Oct 2013 10:02:32 -0400 Received: from cam-admin0.cambridge.arm.com ([217.140.96.50]:40764 "EHLO cam-admin0.cambridge.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751849Ab3JZOCa (ORCPT ); Sat, 26 Oct 2013 10:02:30 -0400 Date: Sat, 26 Oct 2013 15:01:25 +0100 From: Will Deacon To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Thierry Reding , Jean Pihet , Thomas Gleixner , "H. Peter Anvin" , Peter Zijlstra , "linux-next@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , linux@arm.linux.org.uk Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the tip tree Message-ID: <20131026140125.GA13424@mudshark.cambridge.arm.com> References: <1382632289-18523-1-git-send-email-treding@nvidia.com> <1382706224-8859-1-git-send-email-treding@nvidia.com> <1382706224-8859-4-git-send-email-treding@nvidia.com> <20131025132553.GE9999@mudshark.cambridge.arm.com> <20131026084033.GA14237@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20131026084033.GA14237@gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2069 Lines: 43 Hi Ingo, [adding rmk] On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 09:40:33AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Will Deacon wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 02:03:42PM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote: > > > I fixed it up (see below). Please verify that the resolution looks good. > > > Also note that this isn't really a trivial resolution of a conflict, but > > > required modifying various other files. That causes rerere magic not to > > > work and needs part of conflict to be resolved manually. Perhaps a good > > > idea would be to rebase Jean's patch on top of the cleanups going on in > > > the tip tree? Perhaps even carry the patch in the tip tree? > > > > These came via my tree (arm perf) after discussion here: > > > > http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2013-October/203077.html > > > > Now that they've been pulled by rmk, we can't back them out with > > ugly reverts, so I'm not sure what we can do to resolve in the ARM > > tree; it looks like the perf Makefile has changed significantly in > > -tip. > > I realize that it was acked by Arnaldo, but for workflow reasons I'd > really prefer it if non-trivial perf tooling patches went to Arnaldo > as a pull request so that he can resolve any such conflicts. perf is > in constant development so it's less work for you that way. Sure. I wasn't aware quite how much you guys had planned for the perf Makefile and I (wrongly) assumed that Arnaldo's ack was enough of an indication that conflicts would be unlikely and/or trivial. In future, I'll push back on any perf changes outside of arch/ in my tree, but that doesn't help us get out of the current situation: the patches are currently sitting in rmk's tree for 3.13, so that won't meet with -tip (outside of next) until Linus pulls them both. What can we do about that? Will -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/