On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 02:57:48PM -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 02:45:00PM -0700, Pavel Roskin wrote:
> > On Tue, 2009-08-18 at 14:24 -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> >
> > > > Anyway, why is it better for bisecting?
> > >
> > > Because to help developers not have to do:
> > >
> > > git branch -m poo
> > > git checkout -b master origin/master
> > > # Then apply patches manually
> > >
> > > Instead of the better rebasing:
> > >
> > > git branch -m save-my-stuff
> > > git checkout -b master origin/master
> > > git checkout save-my-stuff
> > > git rebase master
> >
> > I use STGit, so perhaps I miss all that fun. I have never had any
> > trouble tracking wireless-testing while keeping my patches.
>
> Oh this was a long time ago, pre ath5k I think.
>
> > > john reverts his patches on wireless-testing before rebasing to Linus'
> > > tree. There may be some other added benefit other than helping us
> > > rebase cleanly, not sure. But I do remember before that I never was
> > > able to rebase my patches, and now rebasing works quite nicely.
> >
> > You mean it's better to track wireless-next-2.6 for those of us trying
> > to stay on top of the wireless development?
>
> No, not at all, I meant wireless-next-2.6 is best for bisecting.
>
> wireless-testing is indeed the place to look at for development.
>
> > I must have missed the
> > memo.
>
> I don't think we ever really publized this much, because technically
> the reverting won't happen unless John rebases and typically between
> rebases to a next RC kernel you *could* technically bisect an issue.
> But not all the times.
>
> > Indeed, wireless-next-2.6 has a couple of commits that
> > wireless-testing doesn't have yet.
> >
> > I agree that having to bisect through reverts is not fun, and it takes
> > one or two extra iterations.
>
> Right, which is why I wanted to mention it, will extend the info on
> the wiki on the development section once John ACKs/NACKs this.
It should not be necessary to bisect through reverts. I maintain
different tags for such purposes.
Always use the lastest merge-* tag as the base for bisection.
This should be equivalent to whichever -rc release from Linus is the
current base for wireless-testing. If you need to go any earlier
than that, you should be using linux-2.6.
So for example with current tree:
git bisect start
git bisect bad master-2009-08-19
git bisect good merge-2009-08-14
This should include all of the current wireless patches in
wireless-testing but not in the base linux-2.6 kernel.
I haven't tracked-down this thread in the archives...am I addressing
the issue correctly?
Hth!
John
--
John W. Linville Someday the world will need a hero, and you
linvi...@tuxdriver.com might be all we have. Be ready.
_______________________________________________
ath9k-devel mailing list
ath9k-devel@lists.ath9k.org
https://lists.ath9k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel
