Sorry for spam, I am resending in cleartext because the previous
missed the lists. Thanks Google for resetting my config when you
'upgraded'.
On Wed, 24 Oct 2018 at 09:05, Kalle Valo <kvalo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Kalle Valo <kvalo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
> > Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> >
> >> On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 7:01 AM Linus Torvalds
> >> <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hmm. Tentatively pulled, but there's something wrong with the Kconfig rules.
> >>
> >> Confirmed.
> >
> > BTW, our emails crossed and more info in the other email[1].
> >
> >> I did a978a5b8d83f ("net/kconfig: Make QCOM_QMI_HELPERS available when
> >> COMPILE_TEST") to fix the breakage.
> >
> > Thanks, though I don't see it yet as I guess you haven't pushed it yet.
> > Do note that it _might_ conflict the other commit which I suspect is in
> > also coming to you:
> >
> > ccfb464cd106 ("soc: qcom: Allow COMPILE_TEST of qcom SoC Kconfigs")
>
> git.kernel.org is alive again for me so I can now check both commits. It
> seems that Niklas' commit[1] is more finegrained than what Linus did[2].
> I guess either of the commits should be reverted when Niklas' commit
> goes to Linus tree, or what's the best course of action?
Yes this will conflict with Niklas's patch which is part of the 4.20
pull requests. I would prefer that we revert Linus's and take
Niklas's unless there is a compelling argument to have it fixed before
-rc1. That said, if you didn't, the merge conflicts would be minor
and easily handled.
Regards,
Andy Gross
