On Fri, Apr 08, 2022 at 11:17:47AM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > You might consider using a linear tree instead of the topic branches, > topics are tricky and I'm not sure it helps a small subsystem so much. > Conflicts between topics are a PITA for everyone, and it makes > handling conflicts with rc much harder than it needs to be. I like the concept of a branch per driver, because with that I can just exclude that branch from my next-merge when there are issues with it. Conflicts between branches happen too, but they are quite manageable when the branches have the same base. Overall I am thinking of reorganizing the IOMMU tree, but it will likely not end up to be a single-branch tree, although the number of patches per cycle _could_ just be carried in a single branch. > At least I haven't felt a need for topics while running larger trees, > and would find it stressful to try and squeeze the entire patch flow > into only 3 weeks out of the 7 week cycle. Yeah, so it is 4 weeks in an 9 weeks cycle :) The merge window is 2 weeks and not a lot happens. The 2 weeks after are for stabilization and I usually only pick up fixes. Then come the 4 weeks were new code gets into the tree. In the last week everything gets testing in linux-next to be ready for the merge window. I will pickup fixes in that week, of course. > In any event, I'd like this on a branch so Alex can pull it too, I > guess it means Alex has to merge rc3 to VFIO as well? Sure, I can put these patches in a separate branch for Alex to pull into the VFIO tree. Regards, Joerg
