Ingo Molnar writes: > If you suggest that each and every subsystem maintainer who touches > code that can be built on non-x86 architectures has to cross-build > to 20+ architectures to be able to push out a tree, all the time, > and has to rebase if this ever gets omitted, you are really defying > reality and are hurting Linux. Nice straw man, but I never said or even suggested anything like that. :) I do think that it's reasonable to expect that a patch which touches the architecture-specific code for some architecture gets compiled for that architecture at least once before it gets set in stone. As far as I can tell, this didn't happen in the case of Martin's patch that triggered this debate. Patches which touch multiple architecture's arch-specific code should also get sent to the maintainers of the affected architectures and the linux-arch mailing list. I don't recall seeing this patch on linux-arch, though I may have missed it (and anyway that would be Martin's responsibility not yours, but it does contribute to the sense of being blindsided). More generally - if you don't have the resources to do regular build testing for powerpc or other architectures, then publish a testing branch and we'll get kisskb (http://kisskb.ellerman.id.au/) to build a selection of configs and architectures automatically. Paul. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-tip-commits" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
|