On Sat, Jul 14, 2018 at 11:09:13PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > For anyone interested in making sure that obscure (whatever that means)
> > drivers are tested for stable releases, but does not want to spend time on
> > it,
> > all I can recommend is to implement qemu support for it and let me
On Sat, Jul 14, 2018 at 11:09:13PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > For anyone interested in making sure that obscure (whatever that means)
> > drivers are tested for stable releases, but does not want to spend time on
> > it,
> > all I can recommend is to implement qemu support for it and let me
Hi!
> >Well, 0day, kernelci etc... is nice... until the change is in the
> >driver. Most of the kernel are drivers, remember?
> >
> >I don't know. I'd say that if patch is important enough for -stable,
> >there should be someone testing it. For core kernel changes, that can
> >be 0day bot, but
Hi!
> >Well, 0day, kernelci etc... is nice... until the change is in the
> >driver. Most of the kernel are drivers, remember?
> >
> >I don't know. I'd say that if patch is important enough for -stable,
> >there should be someone testing it. For core kernel changes, that can
> >be 0day bot, but
On 07/14/2018 12:47 PM, Pavel Machek wrote:
Hi!
The way I see it, if a commit can get one or two tested-by, it's a good
alternative to a week in -next.
Agreed. Even their own actually. And I'm not kidding. Those who run large
amounts of tests on certain patches could really mention is in
On 07/14/2018 12:47 PM, Pavel Machek wrote:
Hi!
The way I see it, if a commit can get one or two tested-by, it's a good
alternative to a week in -next.
Agreed. Even their own actually. And I'm not kidding. Those who run large
amounts of tests on certain patches could really mention is in
Hi!
> >>>The way I see it, if a commit can get one or two tested-by, it's a good
> >>>alternative to a week in -next.
> >>
> >>Agreed. Even their own actually. And I'm not kidding. Those who run large
> >>amounts of tests on certain patches could really mention is in tested-by,
> >>as opposed to
Hi!
> >>>The way I see it, if a commit can get one or two tested-by, it's a good
> >>>alternative to a week in -next.
> >>
> >>Agreed. Even their own actually. And I'm not kidding. Those who run large
> >>amounts of tests on certain patches could really mention is in tested-by,
> >>as opposed to
On 07/14/2018 10:38 AM, Pavel Machek wrote:
Hi!
The way I see it, if a commit can get one or two tested-by, it's a good
alternative to a week in -next.
Agreed. Even their own actually. And I'm not kidding. Those who run large
amounts of tests on certain patches could really mention is in
On 07/14/2018 10:38 AM, Pavel Machek wrote:
Hi!
The way I see it, if a commit can get one or two tested-by, it's a good
alternative to a week in -next.
Agreed. Even their own actually. And I'm not kidding. Those who run large
amounts of tests on certain patches could really mention is in
On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 10:36:04AM +0200, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> I will ping the kernelci folkz to request them to include your new
> fixes branch for daily builds.
No need, I already added it.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 10:36:04AM +0200, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> I will ping the kernelci folkz to request them to include your new
> fixes branch for daily builds.
No need, I already added it.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Hi Krzysztof,
On Tue, 15 May 2018 12:42:49 +0200 Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>
> Please merge following fixes branches from my trees:
> Tree: samsung-krzk
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/krzk/linux.git
> branch: fixes
>
> Tree: pinctrl-samsung
>
Hi Krzysztof,
On Tue, 15 May 2018 12:42:49 +0200 Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>
> Please merge following fixes branches from my trees:
> Tree: samsung-krzk
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/krzk/linux.git
> branch: fixes
>
> Tree: pinctrl-samsung
>
On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 2:43 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Vinod,
>
> On Wed, 9 May 2018 16:25:34 +0530 Vinod Koul wrote:
>> >
>> > I currently have 44 such fixes branches. More welcome!
>>
>> Great so do you want us to send fixes branch or scan
On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 2:43 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Vinod,
>
> On Wed, 9 May 2018 16:25:34 +0530 Vinod Koul wrote:
>> >
>> > I currently have 44 such fixes branches. More welcome!
>>
>> Great so do you want us to send fixes branch or scan the existing trees and
>> add
>> them.
>
> The
Hi Ulf,
On Mon, 14 May 2018 10:36:04 +0200 Ulf Hansson wrote:
>
> I will ping the kernelci folkz to request them to include your new
> fixes branch for daily builds.
Excellent, thanks.
> For mmc, please add my fixes branch according to below.
>
>
Hi Ulf,
On Mon, 14 May 2018 10:36:04 +0200 Ulf Hansson wrote:
>
> I will ping the kernelci folkz to request them to include your new
> fixes branch for daily builds.
Excellent, thanks.
> For mmc, please add my fixes branch according to below.
>
>
On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 10:48:03AM +0200, Boris Brezillon wrote:
+Fengguang
On Mon, 14 May 2018 10:40:10 +0200
Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
Hi Boris,
On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 10:34 AM, Boris Brezillon
wrote:
> On Mon, 14 May 2018 10:29:04
On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 10:48:03AM +0200, Boris Brezillon wrote:
+Fengguang
On Mon, 14 May 2018 10:40:10 +0200
Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
Hi Boris,
On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 10:34 AM, Boris Brezillon
wrote:
> On Mon, 14 May 2018 10:29:04 +0200
> Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>> On Mon, May 14,
+Fengguang
On Mon, 14 May 2018 10:40:10 +0200
Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Hi Boris,
>
> On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 10:34 AM, Boris Brezillon
> wrote:
> > On Mon, 14 May 2018 10:29:04 +0200
> > Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>
+Fengguang
On Mon, 14 May 2018 10:40:10 +0200
Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Hi Boris,
>
> On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 10:34 AM, Boris Brezillon
> wrote:
> > On Mon, 14 May 2018 10:29:04 +0200
> > Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> >> On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 10:12 AM, Boris Brezillon
> >> wrote:
> >>
Hi Boris,
On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 10:34 AM, Boris Brezillon
wrote:
> On Mon, 14 May 2018 10:29:04 +0200
> Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>> On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 10:12 AM, Boris Brezillon
>> wrote:
>> > On Mon, 14 May
Hi Boris,
On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 10:34 AM, Boris Brezillon
wrote:
> On Mon, 14 May 2018 10:29:04 +0200
> Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>> On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 10:12 AM, Boris Brezillon
>> wrote:
>> > On Mon, 14 May 2018 10:00:30 +0200
>> > Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>> >> On Tue, May 1, 2018
On 9 May 2018 at 12:47, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> On Wed, 9 May 2018 18:03:46 +0900 Mark Brown wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 10:47:57AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
>> > On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 10:44 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
>>
>>
On 9 May 2018 at 12:47, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> On Wed, 9 May 2018 18:03:46 +0900 Mark Brown wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 10:47:57AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
>> > On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 10:44 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
>>
>> > > I think this is an excellent idea, copying in Stephen for
On Mon, 14 May 2018 10:29:04 +0200
Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Hi Boris,
>
> On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 10:12 AM, Boris Brezillon
> wrote:
> > On Mon, 14 May 2018 10:00:30 +0200
> > Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> >> On Tue,
On Mon, 14 May 2018 10:29:04 +0200
Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Hi Boris,
>
> On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 10:12 AM, Boris Brezillon
> wrote:
> > On Mon, 14 May 2018 10:00:30 +0200
> > Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> >> On Tue, May 1, 2018 at 10:00 PM, Sasha Levin
> >> wrote:
> >> > On Tue, May
Hi Boris,
On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 10:12 AM, Boris Brezillon
wrote:
> On Mon, 14 May 2018 10:00:30 +0200
> Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>> On Tue, May 1, 2018 at 10:00 PM, Sasha Levin
>> wrote:
>> > On Tue, May 01,
Hi Boris,
On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 10:12 AM, Boris Brezillon
wrote:
> On Mon, 14 May 2018 10:00:30 +0200
> Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>> On Tue, May 1, 2018 at 10:00 PM, Sasha Levin
>> wrote:
>> > On Tue, May 01, 2018 at 03:44:50PM -0400, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote:
>> >>On Tue, May 01, 2018 at
On Mon, 14 May 2018 10:00:30 +0200
Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Tue, May 1, 2018 at 10:00 PM, Sasha Levin
> wrote:
> > On Tue, May 01, 2018 at 03:44:50PM -0400, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote:
> >>On Tue, May 01, 2018 at 04:38:21PM +, Sasha
On Mon, 14 May 2018 10:00:30 +0200
Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Tue, May 1, 2018 at 10:00 PM, Sasha Levin
> wrote:
> > On Tue, May 01, 2018 at 03:44:50PM -0400, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote:
> >>On Tue, May 01, 2018 at 04:38:21PM +, Sasha Levin wrote:
> >>> - A merge window commit spent
On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 6:47 PM, Sasha Levin via Ksummit-discuss
wrote:
> On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 06:03:22PM +0200, Jiri Kosina wrote:
>>On Wed, 9 May 2018, Daniel Vetter wrote:
>>> >> Then, why don't we have a pre-integration tree for fixes? That would
On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 6:47 PM, Sasha Levin via Ksummit-discuss
wrote:
> On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 06:03:22PM +0200, Jiri Kosina wrote:
>>On Wed, 9 May 2018, Daniel Vetter wrote:
>>> >> Then, why don't we have a pre-integration tree for fixes? That would
>>> >> at least simply automated testing of
On Sat, May 12, 2018 at 7:38 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> On Wed, 9 May 2018 20:47:27 +1000 Stephen Rothwell
> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 9 May 2018 18:03:46 +0900 Mark Brown wrote:
>> >
>> > On Wed, May 09, 2018 at
On Sat, May 12, 2018 at 7:38 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> On Wed, 9 May 2018 20:47:27 +1000 Stephen Rothwell
> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 9 May 2018 18:03:46 +0900 Mark Brown wrote:
>> >
>> > On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 10:47:57AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
>> > > On Wed, May 9, 2018 at
On 05/11/2018 09:38 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
Hi all,
On Wed, 9 May 2018 20:47:27 +1000 Stephen Rothwell
wrote:
On Wed, 9 May 2018 18:03:46 +0900 Mark Brown wrote:
On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 10:47:57AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
On Wed, May 9,
On 05/11/2018 09:38 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
Hi all,
On Wed, 9 May 2018 20:47:27 +1000 Stephen Rothwell
wrote:
On Wed, 9 May 2018 18:03:46 +0900 Mark Brown wrote:
On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 10:47:57AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 10:44 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
I
Hi all,
On Wed, 9 May 2018 20:47:27 +1000 Stephen Rothwell
wrote:
>
> On Wed, 9 May 2018 18:03:46 +0900 Mark Brown wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 10:47:57AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > > On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 10:44 AM, Mark Brown
Hi all,
On Wed, 9 May 2018 20:47:27 +1000 Stephen Rothwell
wrote:
>
> On Wed, 9 May 2018 18:03:46 +0900 Mark Brown wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 10:47:57AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > > On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 10:44 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
> > >
> >
> > > > I think this is
Hi David,
On Fri, 11 May 2018 10:47:01 +0200 David Sterba wrote:
>
> Please add
>
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/kdave/linux.git next-fixes
Added from Monday (as btrfs-fixes).
Thanks for adding your subsystem tree as a participant of linux-next. As
you may
Hi David,
On Fri, 11 May 2018 10:47:01 +0200 David Sterba wrote:
>
> Please add
>
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/kdave/linux.git next-fixes
Added from Monday (as btrfs-fixes).
Thanks for adding your subsystem tree as a participant of linux-next. As
you may know, this is
On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 08:47:27PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > True. It's currently only those -fixes branches that people have asked
> > him to merge separately which isn't as big a proportion of trees as have
> > them (perhaps fortunately given people's enthusiasm for fixes branches
> >
On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 08:47:27PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > True. It's currently only those -fixes branches that people have asked
> > him to merge separately which isn't as big a proportion of trees as have
> > them (perhaps fortunately given people's enthusiasm for fixes branches
> >
On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 06:03:22PM +0200, Jiri Kosina wrote:
> On Wed, 9 May 2018, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > Since Stephen merges all -fixes branches first, before merging all the
> > -next branches, he already generates that as part of linux-next. All
> > he'd need to do is push that intermediate
On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 06:03:22PM +0200, Jiri Kosina wrote:
> On Wed, 9 May 2018, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > Since Stephen merges all -fixes branches first, before merging all the
> > -next branches, he already generates that as part of linux-next. All
> > he'd need to do is push that intermediate
Hi Tony,
On Thu, 10 May 2018 08:57:55 -0700 Tony Lindgren wrote:
>
> * Stephen Rothwell [180509 10:49]:
> > I currently have 44 such fixes branches. More welcome!
>
> Can you please also add mine:
>
>
Hi Tony,
On Thu, 10 May 2018 08:57:55 -0700 Tony Lindgren wrote:
>
> * Stephen Rothwell [180509 10:49]:
> > I currently have 44 such fixes branches. More welcome!
>
> Can you please also add mine:
>
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tmlind/linux-omap.git fixes
Added from
Hi Mark,
On Thu, 10 May 2018 22:36:28 +0900 Mark Brown wrote:
>
> On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 08:09:09AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > On Wed, 9 May 2018 23:05:32 +0900 Mark Brown wrote:
>
> > > Well, all my trees have a for-linus branch to go with
Hi Mark,
On Thu, 10 May 2018 22:36:28 +0900 Mark Brown wrote:
>
> On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 08:09:09AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > On Wed, 9 May 2018 23:05:32 +0900 Mark Brown wrote:
>
> > > Well, all my trees have a for-linus branch to go with the for-next
> > > branch for a start.
>
On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 06:03:22PM +0200, Jiri Kosina wrote:
>On Wed, 9 May 2018, Daniel Vetter wrote:
>
>> >> Then, why don't we have a pre-integration tree for fixes? That would
>> >> at least simply automated testing of fixes separately from new
>> >> material.
>> >
>> >> Perhaps this has
On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 06:03:22PM +0200, Jiri Kosina wrote:
>On Wed, 9 May 2018, Daniel Vetter wrote:
>
>> >> Then, why don't we have a pre-integration tree for fixes? That would
>> >> at least simply automated testing of fixes separately from new
>> >> material.
>> >
>> >> Perhaps this has
On Tue, May 08, 2018 at 06:15:34PM -0400, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote:
>On Tue, May 08, 2018 at 08:29:14PM +, Sasha Levin wrote:
>>
>> This is interesting. We have a group of power users who are testing out
>> -rc releases, who are usually happy to test out a fast moving target and
>> provide
On Tue, May 08, 2018 at 06:15:34PM -0400, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote:
>On Tue, May 08, 2018 at 08:29:14PM +, Sasha Levin wrote:
>>
>> This is interesting. We have a group of power users who are testing out
>> -rc releases, who are usually happy to test out a fast moving target and
>> provide
On Wed, 9 May 2018, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> >> Then, why don't we have a pre-integration tree for fixes? That would
> >> at least simply automated testing of fixes separately from new
> >> material.
> >
> >> Perhaps this has already been discussed, and concluded and it's not
> >> worth it, then
On Wed, 9 May 2018, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> >> Then, why don't we have a pre-integration tree for fixes? That would
> >> at least simply automated testing of fixes separately from new
> >> material.
> >
> >> Perhaps this has already been discussed, and concluded and it's not
> >> worth it, then
* Stephen Rothwell [180509 10:49]:
> I currently have 44 such fixes branches. More welcome!
Can you please also add mine:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tmlind/linux-omap.git fixes
Thanks,
Tony
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
* Stephen Rothwell [180509 10:49]:
> I currently have 44 such fixes branches. More welcome!
Can you please also add mine:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tmlind/linux-omap.git fixes
Thanks,
Tony
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
* Tony Lindgren [180508 14:52]:
> * Theodore Y. Ts'o [180508 03:50]:
> > Would I pull down linux-next, and fire up a VM running gce-xfstests?
> > Sure. But that's not a real-life use case; that's just running canned
> > test cases. And more often than not,
* Tony Lindgren [180508 14:52]:
> * Theodore Y. Ts'o [180508 03:50]:
> > Would I pull down linux-next, and fire up a VM running gce-xfstests?
> > Sure. But that's not a real-life use case; that's just running canned
> > test cases. And more often than not, linux-next will be broken while
> >
On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 08:09:09AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> On Wed, 9 May 2018 23:05:32 +0900 Mark Brown wrote:
> > Well, all my trees have a for-linus branch to go with the for-next
> > branch for a start.
> The regmap and regulator trees have no for-linus branch
On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 08:09:09AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> On Wed, 9 May 2018 23:05:32 +0900 Mark Brown wrote:
> > Well, all my trees have a for-linus branch to go with the for-next
> > branch for a start.
> The regmap and regulator trees have no for-linus branch (currently).
> Added
On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 08:47:27PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>On Wed, 9 May 2018 18:03:46 +0900 Mark Brown wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 10:47:57AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
>> > On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 10:44 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
>>
>> > > I
On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 08:47:27PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>On Wed, 9 May 2018 18:03:46 +0900 Mark Brown wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 10:47:57AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
>> > On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 10:44 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
>>
>> > > I think this is an excellent idea, copying
Hi Mark,
On Wed, 9 May 2018 23:05:32 +0900 Mark Brown wrote:
>
> Well, all my trees have a for-linus branch to go with the for-next
> branch for a start.
The regmap and regulator trees have no for-linus branch (currently).
Added sound-asoc-fixes and spi-fixes from today.
Hi Mark,
On Wed, 9 May 2018 23:05:32 +0900 Mark Brown wrote:
>
> Well, all my trees have a for-linus branch to go with the for-next
> branch for a start.
The regmap and regulator trees have no for-linus branch (currently).
Added sound-asoc-fixes and spi-fixes from today.
Thanks for adding your
Hi Boris,
On Wed, 9 May 2018 21:35:28 +0200 Boris Brezillon
wrote:
>
> I see that the nand/fixes and spi-nor/fixes branch are already there [1].
> You can add:
>
> mtd-fixes git git://git.infradead.org/linux-mtd.git#master
Added from today.
> You can also
Hi Boris,
On Wed, 9 May 2018 21:35:28 +0200 Boris Brezillon
wrote:
>
> I see that the nand/fixes and spi-nor/fixes branch are already there [1].
> You can add:
>
> mtd-fixes git git://git.infradead.org/linux-mtd.git#master
Added from today.
> You can also remove the mtd entry [2],
Hi Dan,
On Wed, 9 May 2018 09:04:31 -0700 Dan Williams wrote:
>
> Please add:
>
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/nvdimm/nvdimm.git
> libnvdimm-fixes
>
> We currently merge this into libnvdimm-for-next for -next coverage,
> and resolve any conflicts
Hi Dan,
On Wed, 9 May 2018 09:04:31 -0700 Dan Williams wrote:
>
> Please add:
>
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/nvdimm/nvdimm.git
> libnvdimm-fixes
>
> We currently merge this into libnvdimm-for-next for -next coverage,
> and resolve any conflicts vs new development. Do you
Hi Guenter,
On Wed, 9 May 2018 08:57:33 -0700 Guenter Roeck wrote:
>
> Please add
>
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/groeck/linux-staging.git hwmon
>
> as fixes branch.
Added from today.
Thanks for adding your subsystem tree as a participant of linux-next.
Hi Guenter,
On Wed, 9 May 2018 08:57:33 -0700 Guenter Roeck wrote:
>
> Please add
>
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/groeck/linux-staging.git hwmon
>
> as fixes branch.
Added from today.
Thanks for adding your subsystem tree as a participant of linux-next. As
you may know,
Hi Stephen,
On Wed, 9 May 2018 20:47:27 +1000
Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> On Wed, 9 May 2018 18:03:46 +0900 Mark Brown wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 10:47:57AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > > On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 10:44 AM, Mark Brown
Hi Stephen,
On Wed, 9 May 2018 20:47:27 +1000
Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> On Wed, 9 May 2018 18:03:46 +0900 Mark Brown wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 10:47:57AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > > On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 10:44 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
> > >
> >
> > > > I think this
On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 3:47 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> On Wed, 9 May 2018 18:03:46 +0900 Mark Brown wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 10:47:57AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
>> > On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 10:44 AM, Mark Brown
On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 3:47 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> On Wed, 9 May 2018 18:03:46 +0900 Mark Brown wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 10:47:57AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
>> > On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 10:44 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
>>
>> > > I think this is an excellent idea, copying in
On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 08:47:27PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> On Wed, 9 May 2018 18:03:46 +0900 Mark Brown wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 10:47:57AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > > On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 10:44 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
> >
>
On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 08:47:27PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> On Wed, 9 May 2018 18:03:46 +0900 Mark Brown wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 10:47:57AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > > On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 10:44 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
> >
> > > > I think this is an excellent
On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 08:47:27PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> On Wed, 9 May 2018 18:03:46 +0900 Mark Brown wrote:
> > On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 10:47:57AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > > On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 10:44 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
> > True.
On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 08:47:27PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> On Wed, 9 May 2018 18:03:46 +0900 Mark Brown wrote:
> > On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 10:47:57AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > > On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 10:44 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
> > True. It's currently only those -fixes
On 09-05-18, 22:43, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Vinod,
>
> On Wed, 9 May 2018 16:25:34 +0530 Vinod Koul wrote:
> > >
> > > I currently have 44 such fixes branches. More welcome!
> >
> > Great so do you want us to send fixes branch or scan the existing trees and
> >
On 09-05-18, 22:43, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Vinod,
>
> On Wed, 9 May 2018 16:25:34 +0530 Vinod Koul wrote:
> > >
> > > I currently have 44 such fixes branches. More welcome!
> >
> > Great so do you want us to send fixes branch or scan the existing trees and
> > add
> > them.
>
> The
Hi Vinod,
On Wed, 9 May 2018 16:25:34 +0530 Vinod Koul wrote:
> >
> > I currently have 44 such fixes branches. More welcome!
>
> Great so do you want us to send fixes branch or scan the existing trees and
> add
> them.
The former.
> In case of former please do add
Hi Vinod,
On Wed, 9 May 2018 16:25:34 +0530 Vinod Koul wrote:
> >
> > I currently have 44 such fixes branches. More welcome!
>
> Great so do you want us to send fixes branch or scan the existing trees and
> add
> them.
The former.
> In case of former please do add slave-dma/fixes as well
On 09-05-18, 20:47, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> On Wed, 9 May 2018 18:03:46 +0900 Mark Brown wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 10:47:57AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > > On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 10:44 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
> >
> > > > I think this is
On 09-05-18, 20:47, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> On Wed, 9 May 2018 18:03:46 +0900 Mark Brown wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 10:47:57AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > > On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 10:44 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
> >
> > > > I think this is an excellent idea, copying in Stephen
On Wed, 9 May 2018 18:03:46 +0900 Mark Brown wrote:
>
> On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 10:47:57AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 10:44 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
>
> > > I think this is an excellent idea, copying in Stephen for his input.
>
On Wed, 9 May 2018 18:03:46 +0900 Mark Brown wrote:
>
> On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 10:47:57AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 10:44 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
>
> > > I think this is an excellent idea, copying in Stephen for his input.
> > > I'm currently on holiday but unless
On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 10:47:57AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 10:44 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
> > I think this is an excellent idea, copying in Stephen for his input.
> > I'm currently on holiday but unless someone convinces me it's a terrible
> > idea
On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 10:47:57AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 10:44 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
> > I think this is an excellent idea, copying in Stephen for his input.
> > I'm currently on holiday but unless someone convinces me it's a terrible
> > idea I'm willing to at
On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 10:47 AM, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 10:44 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
>> On Fri, May 04, 2018 at 04:21:26PM +0200, Ulf Hansson wrote:
>>> Then, why don't we have a pre-integration tree for fixes? That would
>>> at
On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 10:47 AM, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 10:44 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
>> On Fri, May 04, 2018 at 04:21:26PM +0200, Ulf Hansson wrote:
>>> Then, why don't we have a pre-integration tree for fixes? That would
>>> at least simply automated testing of fixes
On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 10:44 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Fri, May 04, 2018 at 04:21:26PM +0200, Ulf Hansson wrote:
>
>> Then, why don't we have a pre-integration tree for fixes? That would
>> at least simply automated testing of fixes separately from new
>> material.
>
>>
On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 10:44 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Fri, May 04, 2018 at 04:21:26PM +0200, Ulf Hansson wrote:
>
>> Then, why don't we have a pre-integration tree for fixes? That would
>> at least simply automated testing of fixes separately from new
>> material.
>
>> Perhaps this has already
On Fri, May 04, 2018 at 04:21:26PM +0200, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> Then, why don't we have a pre-integration tree for fixes? That would
> at least simply automated testing of fixes separately from new
> material.
> Perhaps this has already been discussed, and concluded and it's not
> worth it, then
On Fri, May 04, 2018 at 04:21:26PM +0200, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> Then, why don't we have a pre-integration tree for fixes? That would
> at least simply automated testing of fixes separately from new
> material.
> Perhaps this has already been discussed, and concluded and it's not
> worth it, then
On Tue, May 08, 2018 at 07:49:59AM -0700, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> * Theodore Y. Ts'o [180508 03:50]:
> > The people who run Linus's tree and test -rc kernels tend to be kernel
> > developers and individual users who want to run bleeding edge kernels
> > and who generally are
On Tue, May 08, 2018 at 07:49:59AM -0700, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> * Theodore Y. Ts'o [180508 03:50]:
> > The people who run Linus's tree and test -rc kernels tend to be kernel
> > developers and individual users who want to run bleeding edge kernels
> > and who generally are technically clueful.
On Tue, May 08, 2018 at 08:29:14PM +, Sasha Levin wrote:
> What if, instead, Linus doesn't actually ever release a point release?
> We can make the merge window open more often, and since there's no
> actual release, people won't rush to push fixes in later -rc cycles.
And then what's the
On Tue, May 08, 2018 at 08:29:14PM +, Sasha Levin wrote:
> What if, instead, Linus doesn't actually ever release a point release?
> We can make the merge window open more often, and since there's no
> actual release, people won't rush to push fixes in later -rc cycles.
And then what's the
1 - 100 of 246 matches
Mail list logo