On Thu, 30 Dec 2010, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > Doesn't this patch series break the 'bisectable' rule for patches? > > I think you can get by with adding a CONFIG_EXPERT selects CONFIG_EMBEDDED > > in the first patch and the last patch removing that same selects. > > How about leaving it that way during the merge window even? That would > help people sending git pull requests that add new dependencies on > CONFIG_EMBEDDED. David can submit another patch that removes the > temporary CONFIG_EMBEDDED option along with any new users in -rc2 > or for 2.6.39 then. > Ok, so there are a few pending EMBEDDED dependency additions in linux-next as of next-20101230, which should be a pretty good indicator of what type of conflict we might risk during the merge window. - three new defconfig files: 89ba4d12: arch/arm/configs/ag5evm_defconfig 6cfce27c: arch/arm/configs/omap1_defconfig d58f0967: arch/blackfin/configs/BF561-EZKIT-SMP_defconfig - 3ce05168 (drm/kms: load fbcon from drm_kms_helper) - b595076a (tree-wide: fix comment/printk typos) Instead of CONFIG_EXPERT select CONFIG_EMBEDDED, we could add a ninth patch which does CONFIG_EMBEDDED select CONFIG_EXPERT and tag it in some way so we know it's only temporary for the merge window to find new CONFIG_EMBEDDED entries. Andrew, this would be going through your -mm tree anyway, so how would you prefer to merge it? -- 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
