On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 4:52 PM, Jason Cooper <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 03:45:42PM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
>> So what I mean is that the patches creating pinctrl/mvebu is in the >> pinctrl tree, so if patches in the MVEBU tree depend on these, >> then it must have pulled in a branch from pinctrl or applied the >> same patches in that tree too (which is OK *sometimes*). > > Yes, Thomas and Gregory informed me of the pinctrl dependency and said > they were using for-next from the pinctrl tree. I've used that branch > to merge and build successfully. Is that ok in practice or is there a > more specific branch I should pull in as a dependency? Do not use for-next. That is a mix-down for the linux-next tree. It is basically created like this: git checkout for-next git reset --hard fixes git merge devel fixes will be based on the latest release candidate and devel on something older like -rc1, -rc2. If you pull something in it must be from the devel branch. The ebst idea is to take the last commit in the devel branch that you need, so the last mvebu commit in that branch. This is what the ARM SoC guys usually does. So: git pull <pinctrl tree> devel git log ... <find the commit you need e.g 10930572> git checkout -b my-new-mvebu-stuff 10930572 So you branch off where you have the deps you need. That way I can still reorder patches *above* that commit (not that I should, but sometimes we discover commits that are not bisectable and such exceptions). The result can the be pulled into my tree or ARM SoC or similar. Linus Walleij -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
