From: ebiederm@xmission•com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership•com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte•hu>,
netdev@vger•kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger•kernel.org,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k•org>,
Linux Containers <containers@lists•osdl.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation•org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Namespace file descriptors for 2.6.40
Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 01:11:19 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <m1aaeco6vs.fsf@fess.ebiederm.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1306221981.10201.8.camel@mulgrave.site> (James Bottomley's message of "Tue, 24 May 2011 11:26:21 +0400")
James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership•com> writes:
> On Tue, 2011-05-24 at 00:03 -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>> Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte•hu> writes:
>>
>> > I agree with Linus's notion in this thread though, a core kernel change should
>> > generally not worry about hooking up rare-arch system calls (concentrate on the
>> > architectures that get tested most) - those are better enabled gradually
>> > anyway.
>>
>> The way I read it he was complaining about my having parisc bits and
>> asking for my branch to be merged before the parisc bits had been
>> merged. Which I credit as a fair complaint. If I am going to depend on
>> other peoples trees I should wait.
>>
>> At the same time when I am busy looking for every possible source of
>> trouble and putting code into net-next to detect pending conflicts,
>> and when maintainers complain when I ask for review that my patches
>> conflict with their patches. Being a contentious developer I am
^^^^^^^^^^^ conscientious
I didn't realize it was possible to make that typo.
>> inclined to do something.
>
> Right ... and the problem is that someone has to care, because the
> conflict will show up in linux-next. I think Stephen Rothwell would
> appreciate us making his life easier rather than leaving it to him to
> sort out the problems.
>
>> Now that the reality has sunk in that it means waiting for other peoples
>> code to be merged before I request for my changes to be merged I don't
>> think I will structure a tree that way again while I remember.
>
> Right. This is quite a common occurrence in SCSI (mostly changes
> entangled with block or libata). If you don't feel comfortable running
> a postmerge tree, just send me the bits and I'll do it (after all it
> works either way around: I can pull in the syscalls and depend on your
> tree rather than vice versa).
Well for the moment I don't see too many problems. I sent another pull
request to Linus earlier today now that your changes are in. So I am
hoping either Linus will pull my tree or someone will educate me on what
he will Linus will accept.
Right now my tree is tested and in a good state. Heck I'm running it
to send this email. So I am reluctant to change anything without clear
feedback.
James when you refer to a postmerge tree what are the dynamics/semantics
usually associated with that? Is this a tree that gets pulled a couple
of times? Once with the non-conflicting bits. Another time when the
bits it depends on have been merged? Or is this a tree that gets pulled
after the merge window entirely?
Eric
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-05-24 8:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-05-21 23:39 [GIT PULL] Namespace file descriptors for 2.6.40 Eric W. Biederman
2011-05-21 23:42 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-05-22 0:33 ` Eric W. Biederman
[not found] ` <m1boyvpo9r.fsf-+imSwln9KH6u2/kzUuoCbdi2O/JbrIOy@public.gmane.org>
2011-05-22 7:13 ` James Bottomley
2011-05-22 8:42 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-05-24 7:03 ` Eric W. Biederman
2011-05-24 7:16 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-05-25 0:34 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2011-05-25 8:25 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-05-25 8:35 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2011-05-25 12:47 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-05-25 13:00 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2011-05-25 13:17 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-05-25 15:22 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2011-05-24 7:26 ` James Bottomley
2011-05-24 8:11 ` Eric W. Biederman [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2011-05-23 21:05 Eric W. Biederman
2011-05-25 21:05 ` C Anthony Risinger
2011-05-25 21:38 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2011-05-25 21:55 ` C Anthony Risinger
2011-05-25 22:11 ` Michał Mirosław
2011-05-25 23:40 ` Eric W. Biederman
2011-05-27 20:18 ` C Anthony Risinger
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=m1aaeco6vs.fsf@fess.ebiederm.org \
--to=ebiederm@xmission$(echo .)com \
--cc=James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership$(echo .)com \
--cc=containers@lists$(echo .)osdl.org \
--cc=geert@linux-m68k$(echo .)org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte$(echo .)hu \
--cc=netdev@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation$(echo .)org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox