Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261571AbVCDGUg (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Mar 2005 01:20:36 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261582AbVCDGUg (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Mar 2005 01:20:36 -0500 Received: from fire.osdl.org ([65.172.181.4]:12709 "EHLO smtp.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261571AbVCDGU0 (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Mar 2005 01:20:26 -0500 Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2005 22:20:16 -0800 From: Chris Wright To: Jeff Garzik Cc: Andrew Morton , Chris Wright , olof@austin.ibm.com, paulus@samba.org, rene@exactcode.de, torvalds@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, greg@kroah.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] trivial fix for 2.6.11 raid6 compilation on ppc w/ Altivec Message-ID: <20050304062016.GO5389@shell0.pdx.osdl.net> References: <422751D9.2060603@exactcode.de> <422756DC.6000405@pobox.com> <16935.36862.137151.499468@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com> <20050303225542.GB16886@austin.ibm.com> <20050303175951.41cda7a4.akpm@osdl.org> <20050304022424.GA26769@austin.ibm.com> <20050304055451.GN5389@shell0.pdx.osdl.net> <20050303220631.79a4be7b.akpm@osdl.org> <4227FC5C.60707@pobox.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4227FC5C.60707@pobox.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1789 Lines: 40 * Jeff Garzik (jgarzik@pobox.com) wrote: > Andrew Morton wrote: > >Chris Wright wrote: > >>Olof's patch is in the linux-release tree, so this brings up a point > >>regarding merging. If the quick fix is to be replaced by a better fix > >>later (as in this case) there's some room for merge conflict. Does this > >>pose a problem for either -mm or Linus' tree? > > > >It depends who gets to Linus's tree first. If linux-release merges first, > >I just revert the temp fix while adding the real fix. But the temp fix > >should never have gone into Linus's tree in the first place. Consider it first patch in fixup series ;-) > >If I merge before linux-release, I guess Linus has some conflict resolving > >to do when he pulls from linux-release. That's OK for an obvious > >two-liner, but would get out of control for more substantial things. > > > >Neither solution is acceptable, really. I suspect the idea of pulling > >linux-release into mainline won't work very well, and that making it a > >backport tree would be more practical. > > Maybe you're right, but I tend to think that "quick, get that fix out > immediately" fixes will appear before more substantial fixes. That is > certainly the way things have worked up until now. > > For the cases that we care about, putting that into linux-release and > then pulling would seem more appropriate. Yes, and this case was on the border of a newly existing system. thanks, -chris -- Linux Security Modules http://lsm.immunix.org http://lsm.bkbits.net - 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/