From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932169AbbLCByI (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Dec 2015 20:54:08 -0500 Received: from mga02.intel.com ([134.134.136.20]:10695 "EHLO mga02.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932109AbbLCBxt (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Dec 2015 20:53:49 -0500 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.20,375,1444719600"; d="scan'208";a="611605202" Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2015 09:53:38 +0800 From: Fengguang Wu To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior Cc: linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Steven Rostedt , kbuild-all@01.org, jianchuan.wang@windriver.com, tglx@linutronix.de, yang.shi@windriver.com Subject: Re: [kbuild-all] [PATCH] locking_selftest: Save/restore migrate_disable_atomic in locking selftest Message-ID: <20151203015338.GA29842@wfg-t540p.sh.intel.com> References: <1448263178-28397-1-git-send-email-jianchuan.wang@windriver.com> <201511231529.iE0YvIjj%fengguang.wu@intel.com> <20151123084325.4f0b4d62@gandalf.local.home> <20151123141408.GA24611@wfg-t540p.sh.intel.com> <5653241F.4070704@linutronix.de> <20151123150303.GA26066@wfg-t540p.sh.intel.com> <565DE010.3040907@linutronix.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <565DE010.3040907@linutronix.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Sebastian, On Tue, Dec 01, 2015 at 06:59:44PM +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > On 11/23/2015 04:03 PM, Fengguang Wu wrote: > > Thanks! Yes, a stable branch name would be better than "linux-4.1.y-rt" > > that's like to become stable over time. > > finally. I got to it. > I pushed two branches @ pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/rt/linux-rt-devel.git: > > for-kbuild-bot/current-stable [0] > for-kbuild-bot/prepare-release [1] > > Branch [0] should contain the last -RT release. This could be used for > testing patches against (if you find one with the RT marker in subject). > The tree should start a stable-tree marker (currently it is v4.1.13) > and have -RT tree applied on top. You should be able compile after each > commit (between the stable tag and HEAD) and nothing should introduce > warnings or fail to compile. Got it, I've updated the RT => for-kbuild-bot/current-stable mapping accordingly, thanks for the info! > The second branch [1] would be similar to the first one except that I > plan to push stuff there before I make a release it. Does this make > sense or do I over think this? It's fair enough. > If you do compile tests, it would be nice if you could enable > CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT_FULL. That is where most of the changes start to work. > Nevertheless it should also work without it(i.e. no preemption or > desktop). OK, I'll increase testing for CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT_FULL when it's the RT tree. > If you have slightly different naming scheme or suggestions just tell > me I will adapt to it:) > > Thank you for the service. You are welcome! Thanks, Fengguang