Andrew Morton wrote: > On Thu, 23 May 2019 07:39:25 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > I put an example patch into my subversion repository: > > > > > > svn checkout > > > https://svn.osdn.net/svnroot/tomoyo/branches/syzbot-patches/ > > > > > > To fetch up-to-date debug printk() patches: > > > > > > cd syzbot-patches > > > svn update > > > > > > Does this work for you? > > > > Neither will fit into my normal workflow. > > > > So, tell me, what are you trying to do? What does you work depend on? > > Just Linus' tree, or something already in linux-next? Why would you > > want to keep moving your patch(es) on top of linux-next?
"[PATCH] printk: Monitor change of console loglevel." is targeted for linux-next only, and I estimate that this patch will be removed in a week or so, for syzbot can reproduce this problem using linux-next and syzbot will blacklist testcases causing this problem. "[PATCH] kernel/hung_task.c: Monitor killed tasks." is targeted for upstream, for syzbot is hitting this problem in any tree and this will be a kernel's problem. But for feasibility check, for now I want to try this patch on only linux-next. I guess we need to tune (e.g. add sysctl) before sending to linux.git tree. I am seeking for an approach which is less burden for both of you. But it seems that using Andrew's route seems to fit better for Stephen's workflow. > > um, I can carry developer-only linux-next debug patches. > OK. Then, will you carry these patches? Regards.
