On 12.04.2013, at 22:56, Alexander Graf wrote: > > On 12.04.2013, at 22:54, Marcelo Tosatti wrote: > >> On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 03:50:13PM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote: >>> >>> On 11.04.2013, at 15:45, Marcelo Tosatti wrote: >>> >>>> On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 12:59:04PM +1100, Paul Mackerras wrote: >>>>> On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 03:33:12AM +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote: >>>>>> On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 12:35:09AM +0100, Alexander Graf wrote: >>>>>>> I agree. So if it doesn't hurt to have the same commits in kvm/next and >>>>>>> kvm/master, I'd be more than happy to send another pull request with >>>>>>> the important fixes against kvm/master as well. >>>>>>> >>>>>> If it will result in the same commit showing twice in the Linus tree in >>>>>> 3.10 we cannot do that. >>>>> >>>>> Why not? In the circumstances it seems perfectly reasonable to me. >>>>> Git should merge the branches without any problem, and even if it >>>>> doesn't, Linus is good at fixing merge conflicts. >>>>> >>>>> Paul. >>>> >>>> Yes, should avoid duplicate commits but its not fatal for them to exist. >>> >>> So I may send a pull request against 3.9 with the 3 commits that already >>> are in kvm/next? >> >> If you decide that the fixes are important enough to justify the >> existance of duplicate commits, i don't see a problem. > > Great :). I already sent the pull request out with all patches that fix > regressions.
Ping? Did these go to Linus? Alex -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm-ppc" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
