On 07/25/2012 07:30 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote:

On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 3:58 PM, Jeff Garzik [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

What is the right course in when a post-merge change is needed?

Just describe the issue and the required change. Than I can just do it
as part of the merge, and now the whole series is bisectable,
including the merge itself.

Here's a (fairly bad) example:

   http://www.spinics.net/lists/netdev/msg192349.html

and the reason I call that a bad example is not because that's a bad
pull request, but simply that those are all real data conflicts, not
the more subtle kind of "it merges fine, but because new code
introduced uses an interface that changed, you need to do xyz".

Thanks, so noted.  I guess if the merge gets more complex than something 
easily described in an email, that implies that maintainers should do 
more cross-coordination and maybe a merge tree.

What's the best way for libata to move forward, now that this hideous 
merge has been pushed out to the Well Known libata branches?  The 
pre-jgarzik-merge commit you would have pulled is 
dc7f71f486f4f5fa96f6dcf86833da020cde8a11 had my pull request been proper.

I can lop off the top 3 commits and force-update the libata-dev.git 
branches, then send a new pull request -- but you have grumbled at that 
sort of behavior in maintainer trees before too...

	Jeff