Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Mon, 24 Jul 2023 08:31:37 -0700
From:   "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>
To:     Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>,
        Thomas =?iso-8859-1?Q?Wei=DFschuh?= <thomas@t-8ch.de>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Upcoming nolibc pull request for the next merge window
Message-ID: <b15fa4c4-cb1f-4bf6-af04-5d549f326f95@paulmck-laptop>
Reply-To: paulmck@kernel.org
References: <7afafb6c-9664-44a1-bc8f-d20239db1dd5@paulmck-laptop>
 <20230722130120.6e4c0eab@canb.auug.org.au>
 <2c54d017-226e-41c3-a767-a607942ecba5@paulmck-laptop>
 <5d9f724d-4c45-f843-04b3-60a907b9b127@linuxfoundation.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <5d9f724d-4c45-f843-04b3-60a907b9b127@linuxfoundation.org>
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Jul 24, 2023 at 08:49:40AM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote:
> 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 Wei?schuh 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.

If the duplicate patches all have the same SHA-1 hashes, we should be
good, right?  Or am I missing something subtle here?

							Thanx, Paul