On Thu, 17 May 2018 07:40:44 -0700 "Paul E. McKenney" <paul...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> Hello, Steve! > > Another year, another difficult-to-branch set of RCU commits. > > In happy contrast to last year, I can make some branches (SRCU, some > of the torture commits, and a few miscellaneous commits), but I will > likely end up with several short branches and one huge one. My thought > is to keep the long branch, but email the patches out in a few separate > serieses, with each depending on its predecessor. For example, one series > from the big branch would be folding the ->gpnum and ->completed fields > into a single ->gp_seq, which helps the RCU-flavor consolidation task. > Another series suppresses some rare false-positive splats that have been > plaguing me for more than a year. Yet another series within this huge > branch applies and optimizes funnel locking for grace-period startup. > > The problem is that the conversion to ->gp_seq has a very large footprint, > which of course generates lots of conflicts. I could of course collapse > these commits into a single commit, but if I did that I would also defer > to the merge window following v4.19 due to the resulting loss of bisection > within that change. > > Any advice? > > The commits are for-mingo..rcu/dev in my -rcu tree. I don't see these branches (and I don't pull tags). How bad are the conflicts? Or is it too late to respond to help (sorry, was on vacation :-) -- Steve
