On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 05:21:29PM -0500, Kees Cook wrote: > On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 5:09 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux > <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 08:34:17AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote: > >> On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 5:21 AM, Paolo Pisati <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > Hi, > >> > > >> > i keep hitting this with BRIDGE=m, JUMP_LABEL=y and > >> > DEBUG_SET_MODULE_RONX=y: > >> > >> I think my RO/NX patch series solves this. I sent a pull request, but > >> I haven't seen any movement on it. :( > > > > Sorry Kees. > > > > However, even if I had looked at it, I would /not/ have been able to > > pull it. It does the absolutely fatal thing for any pull request: > > > > The following changes since commit cc31d8f887953e9824c4d9333b15c335ee7d1b65: > > > > Merge branches 'fiq' (early part), 'fixes' and 'misc' into for-next > > (2014-09-2+6 14:40:19 +0100) > > > > That commit is on my "for-next" branch. The clue is in the name. :) > > Just like trying to base commits onto the linux-next tree, trying to > > base commits on an aggregate branch intended for linux-next usage > > doesn't work for all the same reasons. > > Ah! My mistake; I was trying to figure out which branch would be best > for you to pull from. What do you prefer I use as the base for the > pull request?
I much prefer branches against one of Linus' release points than some point in someone elses tree - unless, of course, there are dependencies that need to be solved (which means there should be something in the pull request explaining that.) If it conflicts with something I have in my tree, then that's generally not a problem unless the conflict is horrid, at which point it can be discussed. -- FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: currently at 9.5Mbps down 400kbps up according to speedtest.net. -- 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/
