On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 08:49:04AM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote: > 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.
Ok, I wasn't comfortable with that. Thanks for the explaination. > 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. ok. > 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 makes sense. I also need: gpiolib: fix bug and clarify OF use of ranges I'll let you know if I run into any trouble. thx, Jason. -- 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/
