On Mon, Dec 09, 2019 at 05:39:12PM +0000, Ramsay Jones wrote: > > > On 08/12/2019 23:19, Luc Van Oostenryck wrote: > > These few patches contains some fixes or improvements > > of diagnostic concerning the size of bitfields. > > > > > > This series is also available at: > > git://github.com/lucvoo/sparse-dev.git bitfield-size > > I tested these patches by applying them on top of current 'master' > branch (@817270f9). I tested in the usual way (Linux 32-&64-bit and > cygwin) including a quick run over git source, without issue. > > Today, I noticed that the above branch was based on commit 9b2efc15 > rather than 'master'. I just did a trial merge of 'luc/bitfield-size' > with 'master' and 'git-diff'ed the result against my tested branch > head - no difference shown. So, I think we are good! (famous last > words) ;-) Yes, I very often have 2 or three topics active at the same time and I tend to let them 'soak' for a few days. I also tend to not rebase them without a very good reason. So, it often happens that a series I post is based on a later version that the current master. Most of the time the active series are independents and so their merges are absolutely trivial, but not always ... I'll try to use the option '--base' of git format-patch more systematically (U've begin to use it a bit lately) and return to my previous good habit of publishing the tree of every series (I suppose it's always faster than to take them from the emails of even from patchwork). Anyway, thank you vry much for the testing. It's pushed now to the main tree. -- Luc
