Hi Stephen,
On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 11:11 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 assumed you could apply changes as a diff/patches/cherry-pick, not
as a merge, for those that went on top of others (so that at the new
merge window, conflicts were already solved). Otherwise, why are
next-* tags/branches provided anyway?
>
> > 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.
Then who is solving the conflict?
Thanks!
Cheers,
Miguel
