Pull request for u-boot-arm -> u-boot?
Albert,
I was wondering when the next pull request for u-boot-arm/master -> u-boot/master was likely to be?
I asked because some changes to the Tegra USB driver went through the u-boot-tegra/master and hence are now in u-boot-arm/master, but not in u-boot-usb/master. I have some more USB driver changes which rely on the earlier USB patches, and these should really go through u-boot-usb/master rather than the Tegra/ARM tree. For this to happen, u-boot-usb/master needs to contain the patches currently in u-boot-arm/master, and the best way for that to happen is for those patches to get into u-boot/master so that u-boot-usb/master can merge them.
Or, should Marek just merge u-boot-arm/master into his tree directly?
Thanks.
Quoted 14 lines · Stephen Warren
Albert,
I was wondering when the next pull request for u-boot-arm/master -> u-boot/master was likely to be?
I asked because some changes to the Tegra USB driver went through the u-boot-tegra/master and hence are now in u-boot-arm/master, but not in u-boot-usb/master. I have some more USB driver changes which rely on the earlier USB patches, and these should really go through u-boot-usb/master rather than the Tegra/ARM tree. For this to happen, u-boot-usb/master needs to contain the patches currently in u-boot-arm/master, and the best way for that to happen is for those patches to get into u-boot/master so that u-boot-usb/master can merge them.
Quoted 1 line
Or, should Marek just merge u-boot-arm/master into his tree directly?
I will not merge u-boot-arm/master into my tree, no. I will wait for the higher- ups to solve this ... Albert, we're waiting :b
Best regards,
Marek Vasut
Hi Marek,
Quoted 15 lines · Marek Vasut
Quoted 14 lines · Stephen Warren
Albert,
I was wondering when the next pull request for u-boot-arm/master -> u-boot/master was likely to be?
I asked because some changes to the Tegra USB driver went through the u-boot-tegra/master and hence are now in u-boot-arm/master, but not in u-boot-usb/master. I have some more USB driver changes which rely on the earlier USB patches, and these should really go through u-boot-usb/master rather than the Tegra/ARM tree. For this to happen, u-boot-usb/master needs to contain the patches currently in u-boot-arm/master, and the best way for that to happen is for those patches to get into u-boot/master so that u-boot-usb/master can merge them.
Quoted 4 lines
Quoted 1 line
Or, should Marek just merge u-boot-arm/master into his tree directly?
I will not merge u-boot-arm/master into my tree, no. I will wait for the higher- ups to solve this ... Albert, we're waiting :b
On it now.
Quoted 2 lines
Best regards,
Marek Vasut
Amicalement,
Signature · 1 line
Albert.
Quoted 14 lines · Stephen Warren
Albert,
I was wondering when the next pull request for u-boot-arm/master -> u-boot/master was likely to be?
I asked because some changes to the Tegra USB driver went through the u-boot-tegra/master and hence are now in u-boot-arm/master, but not in u-boot-usb/master. I have some more USB driver changes which rely on the earlier USB patches, and these should really go through u-boot-usb/master rather than the Tegra/ARM tree. For this to happen, u-boot-usb/master needs to contain the patches currently in u-boot-arm/master, and the best way for that to happen is for those patches to get into u-boot/master so that u-boot-usb/master can merge them.
Quoted 1 line
Or, should Marek just merge u-boot-arm/master into his tree directly?
There's also still a handful of outstanding other patches needing to go in, and really, I'm fine with more frequent PRs rather than waiting for everyone elses to percolate up and then get one with everything.
Signature · 8 lines
Tom -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 836 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: <http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20140505/a5614f40/attachment.pgp>
Hi Tom,
Quoted 16 lines · Tom Rini
Quoted 14 lines · Stephen Warren
Albert,
I was wondering when the next pull request for u-boot-arm/master -> u-boot/master was likely to be?
I asked because some changes to the Tegra USB driver went through the u-boot-tegra/master and hence are now in u-boot-arm/master, but not in u-boot-usb/master. I have some more USB driver changes which rely on the earlier USB patches, and these should really go through u-boot-usb/master rather than the Tegra/ARM tree. For this to happen, u-boot-usb/master needs to contain the patches currently in u-boot-arm/master, and the best way for that to happen is for those patches to get into u-boot/master so that u-boot-usb/master can merge them.
Quoted 5 lines
Quoted 1 line
Or, should Marek just merge u-boot-arm/master into his tree directly?
There's also still a handful of outstanding other patches needing to go in, and really, I'm fine with more frequent PRs rather than waiting for everyone elses to percolate up and then get one with everything.
I'll send out more frequent PRs.
Amicalement,
Signature · 1 line
Albert.
Quoted 14 lines · Stephen Warren
Albert,
I was wondering when the next pull request for u-boot-arm/master -> u-boot/master was likely to be?
I asked because some changes to the Tegra USB driver went through the u-boot-tegra/master and hence are now in u-boot-arm/master, but not in u-boot-usb/master. I have some more USB driver changes which rely on the earlier USB patches, and these should really go through u-boot-usb/master rather than the Tegra/ARM tree. For this to happen, u-boot-usb/master needs to contain the patches currently in u-boot-arm/master, and the best way for that to happen is for those patches to get into u-boot/master so that u-boot-usb/master can merge them.
Quoted 1 line
Or, should Marek just merge u-boot-arm/master into his tree directly?
Or should we have a 'u-boot-next' tree using the same concept as the kernel 'linux-next'?
Quoted 15 lines · Fabio Estevam
Quoted 14 lines · Stephen Warren
Albert,
I was wondering when the next pull request for u-boot-arm/master -> u-boot/master was likely to be?
I asked because some changes to the Tegra USB driver went through the u-boot-tegra/master and hence are now in u-boot-arm/master, but not in u-boot-usb/master. I have some more USB driver changes which rely on the earlier USB patches, and these should really go through u-boot-usb/master rather than the Tegra/ARM tree. For this to happen, u-boot-usb/master needs to contain the patches currently in u-boot-arm/master, and the best way for that to happen is for those patches to get into u-boot/master so that u-boot-usb/master can merge them.
Quoted 4 lines
Quoted 1 line
Or, should Marek just merge u-boot-arm/master into his tree directly?
Or should we have a 'u-boot-next' tree using the same concept as the kernel 'linux-next'?
Please, u-boot-next!
It is clear we need this to scale the pull model.
Signature · 3 lines
Otavio Salvador O.S. Systems http://www.ossystems.com.br http://code.ossystems.com.br Mobile: +55 (53) 9981-7854 Mobile: +1 (347) 903-9750
Quoted 2 lines · Otavio Salvador
Quoted 1 line · Fabio Estevam
On Mon, May 5, 2014 at 1:46 PM, Stephen Warren <[email protected]>
Quoted 15 lines · wrote:
Quoted 15 lines
Quoted 15 lines
Albert,
I was wondering when the next pull request for u-boot-arm/master -> u-boot/master was likely to be?
I asked because some changes to the Tegra USB driver went through the u-boot-tegra/master and hence are now in u-boot-arm/master, but not in u-boot-usb/master. I have some more USB driver changes which rely on the earlier USB patches, and these should really go through u-boot-usb/master rather than the Tegra/ARM tree. For this to happen, u-boot-usb/master needs to contain the patches currently in u-boot-arm/master, and the best way for that to happen is for those patches to get into u-boot/master so that u-boot-usb/master can merge them.
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 4 lines
Quoted 1 line
Or, should Marek just merge u-boot-arm/master into his tree directly?
Or should we have a 'u-boot-next' tree using the same concept as the kernel 'linux-next'?
Please, u-boot-next!
It is clear we need this to scale the pull model.
As Stephen already explained, u-boot-next solves nothing. U-boot-next will actually be explicitly unhelpful here because I won't be able to work on top of it and then send PRs to Tom . This just cannot work as it would break history .
Best regards,
Marek Vasut
Quoted 15 lines · Fabio Estevam
Quoted 14 lines · Stephen Warren
Albert,
I was wondering when the next pull request for u-boot-arm/master -> u-boot/master was likely to be?
I asked because some changes to the Tegra USB driver went through the u-boot-tegra/master and hence are now in u-boot-arm/master, but not in u-boot-usb/master. I have some more USB driver changes which rely on the earlier USB patches, and these should really go through u-boot-usb/master rather than the Tegra/ARM tree. For this to happen, u-boot-usb/master needs to contain the patches currently in u-boot-arm/master, and the best way for that to happen is for those patches to get into u-boot/master so that u-boot-usb/master can merge them.
Quoted 4 lines
Quoted 1 line
Or, should Marek just merge u-boot-arm/master into his tree directly?
Or should we have a 'u-boot-next' tree using the same concept as the kernel 'linux-next'?
Having a u-boot-next won't solve this particular problem in any way.
Having a u-boot-next allows any end-developer to develop on top of the combined code in all trees, thus detecting/avoiding any conflicts with them.
However, my issue above is that a patch that's already applied in tree A needs to make its way into tree B, so that further patches can be *applied* in tree B. This is all about applying patches, not developing patches. The existence (or not) of a u-boot-next tree doesn't affect this issue at all.
Quoted 23 lines · Stephen Warren
Quoted 15 lines · Fabio Estevam
Quoted 14 lines · Stephen Warren
Albert,
I was wondering when the next pull request for u-boot-arm/master -> u-boot/master was likely to be?
I asked because some changes to the Tegra USB driver went through the u-boot-tegra/master and hence are now in u-boot-arm/master, but not in u-boot-usb/master. I have some more USB driver changes which rely on the earlier USB patches, and these should really go through u-boot-usb/master rather than the Tegra/ARM tree. For this to happen, u-boot-usb/master needs to contain the patches currently in u-boot-arm/master, and the best way for that to happen is for those patches to get into u-boot/master so that u-boot-usb/master can merge them.
Quoted 4 lines
Quoted 1 line
Or, should Marek just merge u-boot-arm/master into his tree directly?
Or should we have a 'u-boot-next' tree using the same concept as the kernel 'linux-next'?
Having a u-boot-next won't solve this particular problem in any way.
Quoted 8 lines
Having a u-boot-next allows any end-developer to develop on top of the combined code in all trees, thus detecting/avoiding any conflicts with them.
However, my issue above is that a patch that's already applied in tree A needs to make its way into tree B, so that further patches can be *applied* in tree B. This is all about applying patches, not developing patches. The existence (or not) of a u-boot-next tree doesn't affect this issue at all.
This is in fact a usual problem in Linux land where it seems like we have much more stringent rules on how things can go in. So long as people can collect the needed acks, I'm fine pulling things that touch a few areas into master.
Signature · 8 lines
Tom -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 836 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: <http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20140505/b3a2bb97/attachment.pgp>
Quoted 33 lines · Tom Rini
Quoted 23 lines · Stephen Warren
Quoted 15 lines · Fabio Estevam
Quoted 14 lines · Stephen Warren
Albert,
I was wondering when the next pull request for u-boot-arm/master -> u-boot/master was likely to be?
I asked because some changes to the Tegra USB driver went through the u-boot-tegra/master and hence are now in u-boot-arm/master, but not in u-boot-usb/master. I have some more USB driver changes which rely on the earlier USB patches, and these should really go through u-boot-usb/master rather than the Tegra/ARM tree. For this to happen, u-boot-usb/master needs to contain the patches currently in u-boot-arm/master, and the best way for that to happen is for those patches to get into u-boot/master so that u-boot-usb/master can merge them.
Quoted 4 lines
Quoted 1 line
Or, should Marek just merge u-boot-arm/master into his tree directly?
Or should we have a 'u-boot-next' tree using the same concept as the kernel 'linux-next'?
Having a u-boot-next won't solve this particular problem in any way.
Quoted 8 lines
Having a u-boot-next allows any end-developer to develop on top of the combined code in all trees, thus detecting/avoiding any conflicts with them.
However, my issue above is that a patch that's already applied in tree A needs to make its way into tree B, so that further patches can be *applied* in tree B. This is all about applying patches, not developing patches. The existence (or not) of a u-boot-next tree doesn't affect this issue at all.
Quoted 4 lines
This is in fact a usual problem in Linux land where it seems like we have much more stringent rules on how things can go in. So long as people can collect the needed acks, I'm fine pulling things that touch a few areas into master.
In Linux, cross-repo dependencies are often dealt with by:
a) If the dependency is known up-front: Create a branch based on a recent mainline release, apply the few dependency patches there, then merge this topic branch into multiple repos/branches as a baseline for future work.
b) If the dependency is noticed later, then merge the source branch into the destination branch when the dependencies show up. This ends up pulling in more patches than you need/want into the merge target if the merge source wasn't using topic branches, so isn't a great solution, and isn't done too much.
In general, the situation we that caused me to start the thread is avoided by disallowing patches for e.g. USB drivers to go through anything but the USB tree, unless special arrangements are made to do (a). (a) would allow the conflict to be resolved quickly in the relevant subsystem trees rather than through Linus.
Quoted 3 lines · Tom Rini
Quoted 2 lines · Stephen Warren
Quoted 1 line · Fabio Estevam
On Mon, May 5, 2014 at 1:46 PM, Stephen Warren <[email protected]>
Quoted 32 lines · wrote:
Quoted 26 lines
Quoted 15 lines
Quoted 15 lines
Albert,
I was wondering when the next pull request for u-boot-arm/master -> u-boot/master was likely to be?
I asked because some changes to the Tegra USB driver went through the u-boot-tegra/master and hence are now in u-boot-arm/master, but not in u-boot-usb/master. I have some more USB driver changes which rely on the earlier USB patches, and these should really go through u-boot-usb/master rather than the Tegra/ARM tree. For this to happen, u-boot-usb/master needs to contain the patches currently in u-boot-arm/master, and the best way for that to happen is for those patches to get into u-boot/master so that u-boot-usb/master can merge them.
Quoted 4 lines
Quoted 1 line
Or, should Marek just merge u-boot-arm/master into his tree directly?
Or should we have a 'u-boot-next' tree using the same concept as the kernel 'linux-next'?
Having a u-boot-next won't solve this particular problem in any way.
Having a u-boot-next allows any end-developer to develop on top of the combined code in all trees, thus detecting/avoiding any conflicts with them.
Quoted 5 lines
However, my issue above is that a patch that's already applied in tree A needs to make its way into tree B, so that further patches can be *applied* in tree B. This is all about applying patches, not developing patches. The existence (or not) of a u-boot-next tree doesn't affect this issue at all.
Quoted 4 lines
This is in fact a usual problem in Linux land where it seems like we have much more stringent rules on how things can go in. So long as people can collect the needed acks, I'm fine pulling things that touch a few areas into master.
The problem here is that I cannot apply the USB patches from Stephen until Albert gets his stuff into U-Boot/master, which I would then merge back into mine. Only then I can apply the USB patches. So we're waiting for Albert ...
Best regards,
Marek Vasut