On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 2:11 PM Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi Miguel, > > On Tue, 2 Oct 2018 15:47:12 +0200 Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > The Compiler Attributes series has been stable for 10+ days. To > > increase testing before 4.20, I would to request it being picked up > > for -next. > > > > The changes w.r.t. v5 in the LKML: > > > > - Rebased on top of next-20180928, which required removing > > Unfortunately, trees/branches included in linux-next must be based on > something stable (usually Linus' tree, but it could be another > tree/branch that is included in linux-next that does not rebase). > Linux-next itself rebases every day, so snything based on it would drag > in a previous version of all the other trees :-( I think of this like a branch that's force pushed to. Can't base other branches or trees off of it cause it's always moving/force rewriting history. > > > aligned_largest, which was removed by 9503cd9cbaba > > ("include/linux/compiler*.h: add version detection to > > asm_volatile_goto"). > > That commit is from Andrew's patch series which also rebases (usually > at least every week), so you cannot depend on it. Miguel, you should be able to drop that patch from your set then, since Andrew's -mm tree flows into this -next tree as well, IIUC. We'll take up that patch from there. -- Thanks, ~Nick Desaulniers