Re: [PATCH] trivial fix for 2.6.11 raid6 compilation on ppc w/ Altivec

[Jeff Garzik]

Chris Wright wrote:
> * Olof Johansson (olof@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 03, 2005 at 05:59:51PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> >
> > > This patch doesn't seem right - current 2.6.11 has:
> > >
> > >        return cur_cpu_spec->cpu_features & CPU_FTR_ALTIVEC;
> >
> > The patch was against what Greg had already pushed into the
> > linux-release.bkbits.net 2.6.11 tree, i.e. not what's in mainline.
> > You're right, your revised patch would apply against mainline.
> >
> > However: This patch shouldn't go to mainline, since
> > ppc-ppc64-abstract-cpu_feature-checks.patch in your tree takes care of
> > the problem. I'd like the abstraction/cleanup patch to be merged upstream
> > instead of the #ifdef hack once the tree opens up.
>
>
> Olof's patch is in the linux-release tree, so this brings up a point
> regarding merging.  If the quick fix is to be replaced by a better fix
> later (as in this case) there's some room for merge conflict.  Does this
> pose a problem for either -mm or Linus' tree?

Just need to make sure <whomever> aware of this, when you push to Linus.

In most cases, of dire fixes, they should just go into linux-release, 
and then get pulled into linux-2.6.

For a few cases, like this one, the quick fix will hit linux-release and 
linux-2.6 before the better fix, so no big deal.

In a few rare cases, you will need to create a "for-upstream" tree that 
handles the conflict before it get pushed to Linus.

	Jeff


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