On Fri, 4 Mar 2016, Michael Ellerman wrote: > Obviously it depends heavily on the content of my series, which will go into > powerpc#next, so it would make sense if this went there too. > > I don't see any changes in linux-next for livepatch, so merging it via powerpc > would probably work fine and not cause any conflicts, unless there's some > livepatch changes pending for 4.6 that aren't in linux-next yet? > > The other option is that I put my ftrace changes and this in a topic branch > (based on v4.5-rc3), and then that can be merged into both powerpc#next and the > livepatch tree. This aligns with my usual workflow, so that'd be my preferred way of doing things; i.e. you put all the ftrace changes into a separate topic branch, and then - you pull that branch into powerpc#next - I pull that branch into livepatching tree - I apply the ppc livepatching support on top of that - I send a pull request to Linus only after powerpc#next gets merged to Linus' tree Sounds good? > Also regardless of who takes it an Ack from Steve for the ftrace changes > would be good. Absolutely. Thanks! -- Jiri Kosina SUSE Labs -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe live-patching" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
