On Tue, Aug 04, 2009 at 04:47:41PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Borislav Petkov <borislav.petkov@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Tue, Aug 04, 2009 at 03:50:29PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > > Mind preparing a separate branch for it (.31-rc5 based) and send me > > > > > a pull request so that we can share the commit between the EDAC tree > > > > > and the x86 tree? > > > > > > > > Well, Andreas says the patches need a little polishing and he'll > > > > be sending updated versions soon so you can pick them up. And > > > > since the EDAC MCE stuff might still change before .32 merge > > > > window opens, let's synchronize our pull requests instead. In the > > > > meantime, I'll be rediffing the EDAC stuff against -tip for > > > > linux-next. > > > > > > Would you rebase just due to this commit? > > > > No, I wanted to keep the opportunity to be able to rebase the > > whole series until the very last minute before the merge window, > > should anything need to be changed... > > Note that's the wrong workflow. We dont rebase Git trees really just > because 'something needs to be changed' - we make sure all commits > make sense, we fix bugs and append new changes to the end. That > results in a far better end result than a constant rebasing > workflow. See various mails from Linus on lkml about this topic. (i > have no handy URL for this now - maybe someone else has) Yep, that I know and I agree with completely, I'm simply waiting in case there are more comments on the subject (looka here, the last one was from you :o)). Also, considering that some aspects to the design aren't final, I'd like to be able to rebase. However, I'll make sure I switch to incremental workflow after the majority of the issues are agreed upon. > > > No need for that, feel free to carry it until Andreas sends an > > > updated version. Then i can put it into a separate .31-rc5 based > > > topic that you can pull into the EDAC tree. > > > > ... and this is basically what I had in mind: After you pull them > > in, I'll rebase my branch against yours for linux-next. I see > > that Stephen pulls edac before -tip in linux-next so I'll ask him > > nicely to reorder those. This approach makes most sense anyways > > since edac relies on a bunch of x86 facilities (topology bits, > > rd/wrmsr_on_cpus, mcheck etc) and it is only natural that it goes > > second in linux-next, right? > > > > Then the pull requests will go out in the same order during the > > merge window and we should be fine. > > ok. I'll wait for Andreas's next version of the patch. Feel free to > carry the interim version - just please dont crash the x86 bootup ;-) /me going to kick him to work faster :). -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. Operating | Advanced Micro Devices GmbH System | Karl-Hammerschmidt-Str. 34, 85609 Dornach b. München, Germany Research | Geschäftsführer: Thomas M. McCoy, Giuliano Meroni Center | Sitz: Dornach, Gemeinde Aschheim, Landkreis München (OSRC) | Registergericht München, HRB Nr. 43632 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
