Re: [RESEND v2][GIT PULL] platform-drivers-x86 for 4.2-1

[Darren Hart]

On Thu, Jul 02, 2015 at 09:47:45PM +0200, Rafael Wysocki wrote:
> On Wednesday, July 01, 2015 07:04:34 PM Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 2:24 PM, Darren Hart <dvhart@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > other: Use acpi_video_unregister_backlight instead of acpi_video_unregister in
> > >        serveral drivers.
> > 
> > This was very annoying.
> > 
> > Why? There were several pointless conflicts, because you and Rafael
> > both applied some of the same patches from Hans de Goede, and then
> > Rafael had further cleanups (also from Hans) on top of that, so as a
> > result you have both sides doing changes, but not agreeing on just
> > what the changes are. End result: conflict.

Ugh! When it rains it pours, I made a mess of this pull request.

> > 
> > The conflicts weren't hard to handle, since generally it was trivial
> > to see that "ok, I had already gotten that change and then some" and
> > just pick Rafael's side. But it's annoying because it shows that you
> > guys are stepping on each others toes, and clearly it's not clear who
> > maintains what.
> > 
> > And you guys had clearly both been on the same mail thread, because

Unfortunately, the first 3 preparatory patches were contained within
platform/drivers/x86, so I picked them up. They arrived well before the broader
set of changes which Rafael naturally picked up.

> > Rafael had you as acking the changes that you had then also committed
> > in your own tree. Please talk to each other so that you know who takes
> > what, and we don't have this kind of unnecessary duplication and
> > subsequent extra work.

I thought I just failed to remove them, but as it turns out... it's worse than
that. Michael Ellerman noticed this and reported it, noting he had fixed it up
in next and no action was required. As I have been trying to not rebase my next
branch per the discussion at Kernel Summit, I interpretted that to mean the
fixup was simple enough, and it was better than rebasing the next tree.

(So that's the answer to "Why?" above)

That was foolish in retrospect... how embarrassing.

> > A few duplicate commits aren't the end of the world, so it's not like
> > this is a serious problem, but it's an annoyance.
> 
> Sorry about that, we'll coordinate better next time.

Apologies for the annoyance. I will be more cognisant of this in the future, and
less hesitant to rebase my next branch to avoid such things landing on your
plate.

Sorry for dragging you through the mud with me Rafael :-/

-- 
Darren Hart
Intel Open Source Technology Center
--
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/