Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1220454 > unrolled thread

Re: [git pull] drm for 4.3

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: [git pull] drm for 4.3 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> - 2015-09-08 04:10 +0200
    Re: [git pull] drm for 4.3 Dave Airlie <airlied@gmail.com> - 2015-09-08 05:10 +0200
      Re: [git pull] drm for 4.3 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> - 2015-09-08 06:10 +0200
        Re: [git pull] drm for 4.3 Dave Airlie <airlied@gmail.com> - 2015-09-08 07:00 +0200
          Re: [git pull] drm for 4.3 Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> - 2015-09-08 20:30 +0200

#1220454 — Re: [git pull] drm for 4.3

Hi Linus,

On Fri, 4 Sep 2015 23:40:53 +0100 (IST) Dave Airlie <airlied@linux.ie> wrote:
>
> This is the main pull request for the drm for 4.3. Nouveau is probably the biggest
> amount of changes in here, since it missed 4.2. Highlights below, along with the usual
> bunch of fixes. There are a few minor conflicts with your tree but nothing 
> you can't handle. All stuff outside drm should have applicable acks.
> 
> The following changes since commit c13dcf9f2d6f5f06ef1bf79ec456df614c5e058b:
> 
>   Linux 4.2-rc8 (2015-08-23 20:52:59 -0700)
> 
> are available in the git repository at:
> 
>   git://people.freedesktop.org/~airlied/linux drm-next
> 
> for you to fetch changes up to 73bf1b7be7aab60d7c651402441dd0b0b4991098:
> 
>   Merge branch 'drm-next-4.3' of git://people.freedesktop.org/~agd5f/linux into drm-next (2015-09-05 07:46:09 +1000)

This contains 59 commits added since Sept 1 and 56 of those are only
appearing in today's linux-next.  Not judging, just noting.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1220464

On 8 September 2015 at 12:03, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> Hi Linus,
>
> On Fri, 4 Sep 2015 23:40:53 +0100 (IST) Dave Airlie <airlied@linux.ie> wrote:
>>
>> This is the main pull request for the drm for 4.3. Nouveau is probably the biggest
>> amount of changes in here, since it missed 4.2. Highlights below, along with the usual
>> bunch of fixes. There are a few minor conflicts with your tree but nothing
>> you can't handle. All stuff outside drm should have applicable acks.
>>
>> The following changes since commit c13dcf9f2d6f5f06ef1bf79ec456df614c5e058b:
>>
>>   Linux 4.2-rc8 (2015-08-23 20:52:59 -0700)
>>
>> are available in the git repository at:
>>
>>   git://people.freedesktop.org/~airlied/linux drm-next
>>
>> for you to fetch changes up to 73bf1b7be7aab60d7c651402441dd0b0b4991098:
>>
>>   Merge branch 'drm-next-4.3' of git://people.freedesktop.org/~agd5f/linux into drm-next (2015-09-05 07:46:09 +1000)
>
> This contains 59 commits added since Sept 1 and 56 of those are only
> appearing in today's linux-next.  Not judging, just noting.

Is this to be a regular thing? because I know I'd prefer to merge
fixes than wait for -rc1 to be an accurate copy of linux-next.

Dave.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1220470

Hi Dave,

On Tue, 8 Sep 2015 13:01:21 +1000 Dave Airlie <airlied@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Is this to be a regular thing? because I know I'd prefer to merge
> fixes than wait for -rc1 to be an accurate copy of linux-next.

It happens when I can (almost) keep up with Linus' merge rate (often I
can't).  It is not an issue and I agree that fixes should just be done
as/when needed.  That is why I say "not judging, just noting" - I
generally don't have the time to figure out if each and every unseen
commit is a fix or new feature and/or if it has some possibility of
interacting with some other tree in a way that a few days in linux-next
may have flushed out.

So, if you are happy with what you are doing (and you don't irritate
Linus), then I am happy (as long as you don't cause unnecessary extra
conflicts in linux-next :-)).

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1220475

On 8 September 2015 at 14:04, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> Hi Dave,
>
> On Tue, 8 Sep 2015 13:01:21 +1000 Dave Airlie <airlied@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Is this to be a regular thing? because I know I'd prefer to merge
>> fixes than wait for -rc1 to be an accurate copy of linux-next.
>
> It happens when I can (almost) keep up with Linus' merge rate (often I
> can't).  It is not an issue and I agree that fixes should just be done
> as/when needed.  That is why I say "not judging, just noting" - I
> generally don't have the time to figure out if each and every unseen
> commit is a fix or new feature and/or if it has some possibility of
> interacting with some other tree in a way that a few days in linux-next
> may have flushed out.
>
> So, if you are happy with what you are doing (and you don't irritate
> Linus), then I am happy (as long as you don't cause unnecessary extra
> conflicts in linux-next :-)).
>

Maybe you could heuristic it by ratio new commits or new lines vs the
total size of the -next tree.

i.e. 59 commits in a 5000 commit tree is likely not that bad, 59
commits in a 20 commit tree would be bad.

Though not sure how you'd tune it!

Dave.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1221029

On Mon, Sep 7, 2015 at 9:56 PM, Dave Airlie <airlied@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> i.e. 59 commits in a 5000 commit tree is likely not that bad, 59
> commits in a 20 commit tree would be bad.

I think it's about size of the commits. If it's 59 clean oneliner
fixes, I don't think it's a big deal. If it's 59 patches that add new
functionality, that's a different issue. The size of the base tree is
almost entirely irrelevant in that situation. Fixes are ok, new
features are not.

              Linus
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web