On 04/17/2012 02:05 AM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > On Mon, 2012-04-16 at 15:53 +0300, Avi Kivity wrote: > > > > kvm.git next is exposed to linux-next, where they get tested quite a > > lot. Granted it's mostly build testing, and people are unlikely to > > test > > kvm there, but they will test the non-kvm bits that creep in there. > > > > > The alternative would be that I don't have a -next tree, just > > collect patches and immediately send them to Avi. That way the main > > kvm tree would be broken more often, but at least we don't get these > > horrible synchronization latencies. > > > > That works too. Don't post immediately; 2-3 week batches would reduce > > noise. > > Or do like I do with Kumar for FSL stuff... his stuff gets pulled via my > tree but his tree is in linux-next as well. There's no reason not to do > that. > > That way, his next branch gets linux-next coverage whether it's in my > tree or not, and I pull when I put the final powerpc-next together, > which gives me a chance to do a quick vet "just in case" and sort out > any major conflict before it all goes to Linus. > Sure, that works too. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
