On Thursday 07 February 2013 04:46 PM, James Hogan wrote: > Hi Rusty, > > The metag architecture tree adds an add_taint(TAINT_DIE) like other > architectures do, and the modules-next tree adds the > LOCKDEP_NOW_UNRELIABLE flag to all uses of add_taint (but obviously > misses arch/metag since it doesn't exist yet), causing a compile error > on metag in -next when the two are merged together. > > Is it okay for me to merge your commit 373d4d0 ("taint: add explicit > flag to show whether lock dep is still OK.") in modules-next into the > base of the metag tree and expect it not to be rebased, so that I can > then squash the fix into the metag tree? > > The only commits this would include are: > $ git log --oneline linus/master..373d4d0 > 373d4d0 taint: add explicit flag to show whether lock dep is still OK. > 64748a2 module: printk message when module signature fail taints kernel. > > Thanks > James > Being in the same situation as metag (ARC Port), what's the recommended practice here - do we simply cherry-pick these changes into our tree - or do we merge the "other" tree on top - ofcourse with premise that "other" tree will not rebase. Thx, -Vineet -- 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