On Thu, 09 Nov 2006 19:27:30 -0800
Zachary Amsden <zach@vmware.com> 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.