On Thu, 09 Nov 2006 19:27:30 -0800
Zachary Amsden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> So it's gotten a bit confusing to figure out how we should go about 
> upstreaming the rest of our patches.  Our patchkit in the paravirt-ops 
> tree currently applies to 2.6.19-rc4-mm2, but there are a number of 
> conflicts that got resolved when merging into Andi's i386 tree.
> 
> What is the best way to sanitize the remaining patches so they smoothly 
> integrate into the appropriate trees?  Should we rebase to Andi's tree, 
> resync to -rc5-mm1, or just cross our fingers and fix up rejects as they 
> occur?
> 
> Right now I'm working on getting the timer code for VMI fixed up, and it 
> requires several hooks in the timer infrastructure and possibly the APIC 
> infrastructure that has been changed a lot recently by Thomas Gleixner's 
> patches - I don't see any obvious conflicts, and the new code looks 
> better, but it would be comforting to know I am baking changes against 
> the right tree.
> 

It'd be better to develop and test this work on top of Thomas's stuff, as
that's what 2.6.20 will doubtless look like.  That means working against
-mm.  Once Thomas's patches are in mainline then the patches will apply to
Andi's tree too and I can send them over to him.

That way, the patch-applying-order equals mainstream-merging-order equals
chronological-writing-order, which is generally a good thing.
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization

Reply via email to