From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752513Ab1IVQcO (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Sep 2011 12:32:14 -0400 Received: from hqemgate03.nvidia.com ([216.228.121.140]:10403 "EHLO hqemgate03.nvidia.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751781Ab1IVQcM convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Sep 2011 12:32:12 -0400 X-PGP-Universal: processed; by hqnvupgp06.nvidia.com on Thu, 22 Sep 2011 09:31:49 -0700 From: Stephen Warren To: Russell King - ARM Linux , Olof Johansson CC: Colin Cross , Erik Gilling , Grant Likely , Chris Ball , "linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org" Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2011 09:31:48 -0700 Subject: RE: [PATCH 1/3] arm/tegra: Move EN_VDD_1V05_GPIO to board-harmony.h Thread-Topic: [PATCH 1/3] arm/tegra: Move EN_VDD_1V05_GPIO to board-harmony.h Thread-Index: Acx4/09E/atAVuf2S9a3x4b5t4cqZgARaUmg Message-ID: <74CDBE0F657A3D45AFBB94109FB122FF1739554CBD@HQMAIL01.nvidia.com> References: <1316633620-13184-1-git-send-email-swarren@nvidia.com> <20110922081140.GH17169@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> In-Reply-To: <20110922081140.GH17169@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Russell King - ARM Linux wrote at Thursday, September 22, 2011 2:12 AM: > On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 01:16:49PM -0700, Olof Johansson wrote: > > Works for me. Or I could stage it in a topic branch that would be > > merged after Russell's GPIO tree. > > Holding stuff off from being merged doesn't work. Russell, So I take it I should add the two ack'd patches to the ARM patch system, and have you pick them up? Thanks. > If you have the following commit structure: > > A---...-----M1-B-C-M2 > +---A1-B1-C1' / > +-A2-B2-C2-------' > > Now, lets say A2 depends on C1. Merely delaying the stuff so that M2 > happens after M1 is insufficient to ensure git state doesn't break. > When bisecting, its entirely possible that the bisect algorithm may > chose B2 as a potential test candidate. At that point you end up with > A2, but without C1. > > The only way to solve this is to have A2 following on from C1 - which > of course requires A1..C1 to be declared stable and either pulled into > your local tree or for A2..C2 to be submitted to the same tree which > A1..C1 are already in. -- nvpupblic