Re: [PATCH] docs: move riscv under arch

[Jonathan Corbet]

Conor Dooley <conor@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> On Sat, Sep 30, 2023 at 08:26:38AM -0600, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
>> Conor Dooley <conor@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>> 
>> > On Thu, Sep 28, 2023 at 01:29:42PM +0300, Costa Shulyupin wrote:
>> >> and fix all in-tree references.
>> >> 
>> >> Architecture-specific documentation is being moved into Documentation/arch/
>> >> as a way of cleaning up the top-level documentation directory and making
>> >> the docs hierarchy more closely match the source hierarchy.
>> >> 
>> >> Signed-off-by: Costa Shulyupin <costa.shul@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> >
>> > This doesn't apply to riscv/for-next or next/master, with git
>> > complaining about the sha1 being lacking or useless. What does this
>> > actually apply to?
>> 
>> docs-next, I would guess (though I haven't had a chance to try it).
>
> I'm far from the world's best git-er, but doesn't the lacking or useless
> report from git while trying to apply the patches mean that this patch
> depended on commit that is not in next/master (which I assume includes
> docs-next).

It just means there's a divergence somewhere.  One tree has a patch that
the other lacks, and that creates a conflict making the whole thing
fail.  Business as usual...

jon