Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1657159 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2017-06-04 22:20 +0200 |
| Last post | 2017-06-05 17:00 +0200 |
| Articles | 7 — 3 participants |
Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel
new tree for linux-next: uuid Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> - 2017-06-04 22:20 +0200
Re: new tree for linux-next: uuid Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> - 2017-06-05 02:00 +0200
Re: new tree for linux-next: uuid Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> - 2017-06-05 10:10 +0200
Re: new tree for linux-next: uuid Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> - 2017-06-05 16:10 +0200
Re: new tree for linux-next: uuid Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> - 2017-06-05 16:30 +0200
Re: new tree for linux-next: uuid Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> - 2017-06-05 16:50 +0200
Re: new tree for linux-next: uuid Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> - 2017-06-05 17:00 +0200
| From | Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-04 22:20 +0200 |
| Subject | new tree for linux-next: uuid |
| Message-ID | <tOKad-1to-9@gated-at.bofh.it> |
Hi Stephen, can you please include my uuid tree at: git://git.infradead.org/users/hch/uuid.git for-next into linux-next? We've been doing a fair amount of work on the uuid library and I plan to send it and some work that will pile up on top of it to Linus for the next merge window.
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-05 02:00 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tONB7-3oN-11@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1657159 |
Hi Christoph,
On Sun, 4 Jun 2017 22:14:13 +0200 Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> wrote:
>
> can you please include my uuid tree at:
>
> git://git.infradead.org/users/hch/uuid.git for-next
>
> into linux-next? We've been doing a fair amount of work on the
> uuid library and I plan to send it and some work that will pile
> up on top of it to Linus for the next merge window.
Added from today.
Thanks for adding your subsystem tree as a participant of linux-next. As
you may know, this is not a judgement of your code. The purpose of
linux-next is for integration testing and to lower the impact of
conflicts between subsystems in the next merge window.
You will need to ensure that the patches/commits in your tree/series have
been:
* submitted under GPL v2 (or later) and include the Contributor's
Signed-off-by,
* posted to the relevant mailing list,
* reviewed by you (or another maintainer of your subsystem tree),
* successfully unit tested, and
* destined for the current or next Linux merge window.
Basically, this should be just what you would send to Linus (or ask him
to fetch). It is allowed to be rebased if you deem it necessary.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
sfr@canb.auug.org.au
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-05 10:10 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tOVfk-kl-13@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1657193 |
Meh, thanks. This has been throught the buildbot countless times without a report. But I guess a less generic name might be a good idea to start with. Andy: do you think UUID_INIT/GUID_INIT make sense to your? or _INITIALIZER?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-05 16:10 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tP0RI-3Up-11@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1657337 |
On Mon, 2017-06-05 at 10:07 +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > Meh, thanks. This has been throught the buildbot countless times > without a report. But I guess a less generic name might be a good > idea to start with. > > Andy: do you think UUID_INIT/GUID_INIT make sense to your? > or _INITIALIZER? I'm a bit out of context. Where this will be used? P.S. W/o context latter sounds better to me, but... see above. -- Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> Intel Finland Oy
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-05 16:30 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tP1b4-41e-11@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1657618 |
Hi Andy, On Mon, 05 Jun 2017 17:06:45 +0300 Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> wrote: > > On Mon, 2017-06-05 at 10:07 +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > Meh, thanks. This has been throught the buildbot countless times > > without a report. But I guess a less generic name might be a good > > idea to start with. > > > > Andy: do you think UUID_INIT/GUID_INIT make sense to your? > > or _INITIALIZER? > > I'm a bit out of context. Where this will be used? include/uapi/linux/uuid.h (after the uuid lib changes) contains a definition of the macro GUID() which is probably a bit generic a name for a uapi include file. It also clashes with a couple of other uses of that macro name already in the kernel (one of which produced several warnings in linux-next today). It produces an initializer for a guid_t (structure). -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-05 16:50 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tP1uq-499-19@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1657629 |
On Tue, 2017-06-06 at 00:29 +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi Andy, > > On Mon, 05 Jun 2017 17:06:45 +0300 Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@ > linux.intel.com> wrote: > > > > On Mon, 2017-06-05 at 10:07 +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > Meh, thanks. This has been throught the buildbot countless times > > > without a report. But I guess a less generic name might be a good > > > idea to start with. > > > > > > Andy: do you think UUID_INIT/GUID_INIT make sense to your? > > > or _INITIALIZER? > > > > I'm a bit out of context. Where this will be used? > > include/uapi/linux/uuid.h (after the uuid lib changes) contains a > definition of the macro GUID() which is probably a bit generic a name > for a uapi include file. It also clashes with a couple of other uses > of that macro name already in the kernel (one of which produced > several > warnings in linux-next today). > > It produces an initializer for a guid_t (structure). Just had read and finished answering to a warning. In kernel users shouldn't really use so generic names, we may fix it. OTOH, for user space I dunno if need to export that at all. If we need by some reason, shorter version looks better, GUID_INIT(), UUID_INIT()... -- Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> Intel Finland Oy
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-05 17:00 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tP1E5-4e8-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1657642 |
On Mon, Jun 05, 2017 at 05:43:18PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Tue, 2017-06-06 at 00:29 +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > Hi Andy, > > > > On Mon, 05 Jun 2017 17:06:45 +0300 Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@ > > linux.intel.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, 2017-06-05 at 10:07 +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > > Meh, thanks. This has been throught the buildbot countless times > > > > without a report. But I guess a less generic name might be a good > > > > idea to start with. > > > > > > > > Andy: do you think UUID_INIT/GUID_INIT make sense to your? > > > > or _INITIALIZER? > > > > > > I'm a bit out of context. Where this will be used? > > > > include/uapi/linux/uuid.h (after the uuid lib changes) contains a > > definition of the macro GUID() which is probably a bit generic a name > > for a uapi include file. It also clashes with a couple of other uses > > of that macro name already in the kernel (one of which produced > > several > > warnings in linux-next today). > > > > It produces an initializer for a guid_t (structure). > > Just had read and finished answering to a warning. > In kernel users shouldn't really use so generic names, we may fix it. > > OTOH, for user space I dunno if need to export that at all. > If we need by some reason, shorter version looks better, GUID_INIT(), > UUID_INIT()... I'll fix it up without resending the whole series. I'll also apply your ACPI changes and if there is no major fallout we can declare the branch stable for drm in a few days.
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel
csiph-web