On 12/09/2010 02:49 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote: >> * Patches should be split according to logical steps of changes, not >> per-file. >> >> * Patches should be bisectable. IOW, after applying upto any patch in >> the series, the tree should be buildable and working. > > That does not work for a new architecture. There is nothing to bisect. Sure, but at least it shouldn't introduce build scripts first which wouldn't work at all. >> * When posting a patch series, especially one as large as 211, please >> make the mails for the actual patches replies to the head message. >> Don't post it as 212 separate messages or replies to the immediate >> previous patch. >> >> So, in short, if you're adding a whole new arch, just post it as a >> single patch or a series of several patches if it requires changes >> outside of the specific arch subtree. > > Crap. a single patch is a major PITA for review. It's even worse than > 211 per file patches. Cut the crap. A single patch may not be perfect for reviewing but archs are often merged as a single giant patch as bisection is meaningless anyway. -- tejun -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arch" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
