Return-Path: Received: from mail-qk1-f193.google.com ([209.85.222.193]:36940 "EHLO mail-qk1-f193.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727218AbeJCEuM (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Oct 2018 00:50:12 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20181003071059.02b3fd6f@canb.auug.org.au> In-Reply-To: <20181003071059.02b3fd6f@canb.auug.org.au> From: Miguel Ojeda Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2018 00:04:29 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [GIT PULL linux-next] Add Compiler Attributes tree To: Stephen Rothwell Cc: Andrew Morton , Greg KH , Linux-Next Mailing List , Andreas Dilger , Masahiro Yamada , Michal Marek , Steven Rostedt , Mauro Carvalho Chehab , Olof Johansson , Konstantin Ryabitsev , David Miller , Andrey Ryabinin , Kees Cook , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , Paul Lawrence , Sandipan Das , Andrey Konovalov , David Woodhouse , Will Deacon , Philippe Ombredanne , Paul Burton , David Rientjes , Willy Tarreau , Martin Sebor , Christopher Li , Jonathan Corbet , "Ted Ts'o" , Geert Uytterhoeven , Rasmus Villemoes , Joe Perches , Arnd Bergmann , Dominique Martinet , Stefan Agner , Luc Van Oostenryck , Nick Desaulniers , Linus Torvalds , Linux Doc Mailing List , Ext4 Developers List , linux-sparse@vger.kernel.org, linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Hi Stephen, On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 11:11 PM Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > Hi Miguel, > > On Tue, 2 Oct 2018 15:47:12 +0200 Miguel Ojeda wrote: > > > > The Compiler Attributes series has been stable for 10+ days. To > > increase testing before 4.20, I would to request it being picked up > > for -next. > > > > The changes w.r.t. v5 in the LKML: > > > > - Rebased on top of next-20180928, which required removing > > Unfortunately, trees/branches included in linux-next must be based on > something stable (usually Linus' tree, but it could be another > tree/branch that is included in linux-next that does not rebase). > Linux-next itself rebases every day, so snything based on it would drag > in a previous version of all the other trees :-( I assumed you could apply changes as a diff/patches/cherry-pick, not as a merge, for those that went on top of others (so that at the new merge window, conflicts were already solved). Otherwise, why are next-* tags/branches provided anyway? > > > aligned_largest, which was removed by 9503cd9cbaba > > ("include/linux/compiler*.h: add version detection to > > asm_volatile_goto"). > > That commit is from Andrew's patch series which also rebases (usually > at least every week), so you cannot depend on it. Then who is solving the conflict? Thanks! Cheers, Miguel