* josh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <josh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 11:10:44AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > * Josh Triplett <josh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 07:16:45AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > > > * Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > > Hi Josh,
> > > > >
> > > > > Today's linux-next merge of the tiny tree got a conflict in
> > > > > kernel/time/Makefile between commit fd866e2b116b ("time: Rename
> > > > > udelay_test.c to test_udelay.c") from the tip tree and commit
> > > > > d1f6d68d03ea ("kernel: time: Compile out NTP support") from the tiny
> > > > > tree.
> > > >
> > > > So I think a timer subsystem commit d1f6d68d03ea with this
> > > > magnitude of linecount increase:
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Catalina Mocanu <catalina.mocanu@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > > [josh: Handle CONFIG_COMPAT=y.]
> > > > Reviewed-by: Josh Triplett <josh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Josh Triplett <josh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > ---
> > > > drivers/pps/Kconfig | 2 +-
> > > > include/linux/timex.h | 15 +++++++++++++--
> > > > init/Kconfig | 10 ++++++++++
> > > > kernel/compat.c | 8 ++++++--
> > > > kernel/sys_ni.c | 4 ++++
> > > > kernel/time/Makefile | 3 ++-
> > > > kernel/time/ntp_internal.h | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > > kernel/time/posix-timers.c | 2 ++
> > > > kernel/time/time.c | 2 ++
> > > > kernel/time/timekeeping.c | 2 ++
> > > > 10 files changed, 70 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > at minimum needs the ack of timer folks, before it can be
> > > > committed to Git. Or is the tiny tree plan to submit all
> > > > patches to the appropriate subsystem or gather acks, before
> > > > sending it upstream?
> > >
> > > Yes, absolutely. I planned to send out a tinification patch
> > > review series later this week with all 10 current patches (both
> > > those reviewed on LKML and those only reviewed elsewhere).
> >
> > But, but: _please_ don't push patches towards linux-next that
> > haven't been acked by maintainers.
> [...snip clear explanation of linux-next...]
>
> Thanks for the clarification, Ingo! Mind if I use your explanation as
> the basis for additional documentation of linux-next?
Sure, feel free!
> I've moved the tiny/next branch of my tree to tiny/work, and
> I'll make sure that tiny/next only gets patches that have
> gotten all the necessary reviews.
That looks perfect.
Thanks,
Ingo
--
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
