Re: [PATCH 0/8] FPGA DFL Changes for 5.12

[Greg KH]

On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 07:55:24AM -0800, Tom Rix wrote:
> 
> On 1/11/21 6:54 AM, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 06:40:24AM -0800, Tom Rix wrote:
> >> On 1/10/21 10:57 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> >>> On Sun, Jan 10, 2021 at 11:43:54AM -0800, Tom Rix wrote:
> >>>> On 1/10/21 9:05 AM, Moritz Fischer wrote:
> >>>>> Tom,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Sun, Jan 10, 2021 at 07:46:29AM -0800, Tom Rix wrote:
> >>>>>> On 1/7/21 8:09 AM, Tom Rix wrote:
> >>>>>>> On 1/6/21 8:37 PM, Moritz Fischer wrote:
> >>>>>>>> This is a resend of the previous (unfortunately late) patchset of
> >>>>>>>> changes for FPGA DFL.
> >>>>>>> Is there something I can do to help ?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I am paid to look after linux-fpga, so i have plenty of time.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Some ideas of what i am doing now privately i can do publicly.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> 1. keep linux-fpga sync-ed to greg's branch so linux-fpga is normally in a pullable state.
> >>>>> Is it not? It currently points to v5.11-rc1. If I start applying patches
> >>>>> that require the changes that went into Greg's branch I can merge.
> >>>> I mean the window between when we have staged patches and when they go into Greg's branch.
> >>>>
> >>>> We don't have any now, maybe those two trival ones.
> >>>>
> >>>> Since Greg's branch moves much faster than ours, our staging branch needs to be rebased regularly until its merge.
> >>> Ick, no!  NEVER rebase a public branch.  Why does it matter the speed of
> >>> my branch vs. anyone elses?  Git handles merges very well.
> >>>
> >>> Just like Linus's branches move much faster than mine, and I don't
> >>> rebase my branches, you shouldn't rebase yours.
> >>>
> >>> Becides, I'm only taking _PATCHES_ for fpga changes at the moment, no
> >>> git pulls, so why does it matter at all for any of this?
> >>>
> >>> What is the problem you are trying to solve here?
> >> This 5.12 fpga patchset not making it into 5.11.
> > Ok, but isn't it the responsibility of the submitter to make sure they
> > apply properly when sending them out?
> >
> >> At some point before the 5.11 window, I tried it on next and it failed to merge.
> >>
> >> This points to needing some c/i so it does not happen again.
> > "again"?  Merges and the like are a totally normal thing and happen all
> > the time, I still fail to understand what you are trying to "solve" for
> > here...
> 
> What can I do to help make your merges as easy as possible ?

I have not had any problems with merges, I've only had "problems"
rejecting patches for their content.

Try helping out with patch reviews if you want, finding and fixing
things before I review them is usually a good idea :)

> Does the patchwork infra Moritz was speaking of earlier need fixing help?

No idea, I don't use it.

> Any other things ?

What problems are you trying to solve here?  What's wrong with how this
subsystem is working that you are feeling needs to be addressed?

confused,

greg k-h