On Thu, 09 Nov 2006 19:27:30 -0800 Zachary Amsden <zach at vmware.com> wrote: > So it's gotten a bit confusing to figure out how we should go about > upstreaming the rest of our patches. Our patchkit in the paravirt-ops > tree currently applies to 2.6.19-rc4-mm2, but there are a number of > conflicts that got resolved when merging into Andi's i386 tree. > > What is the best way to sanitize the remaining patches so they smoothly > integrate into the appropriate trees? Should we rebase to Andi's tree, > resync to -rc5-mm1, or just cross our fingers and fix up rejects as they > occur? > > Right now I'm working on getting the timer code for VMI fixed up, and it > requires several hooks in the timer infrastructure and possibly the APIC > infrastructure that has been changed a lot recently by Thomas Gleixner's > patches - I don't see any obvious conflicts, and the new code looks > better, but it would be comforting to know I am baking changes against > the right tree. > It'd be better to develop and test this work on top of Thomas's stuff, as that's what 2.6.20 will doubtless look like. That means working against -mm. Once Thomas's patches are in mainline then the patches will apply to Andi's tree too and I can send them over to him. That way, the patch-applying-order equals mainstream-merging-order equals chronological-writing-order, which is generally a good thing.
