linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/90] Post 2.6.21 OMAP update

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <adaslbe8ykc.fsf@cisco.com>
Date:	Thu, 05 Apr 2007 11:29:23 -0700
From:	Roland Dreier <rdreier@...co.com>
To:	Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>
Cc:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/90] Post 2.6.21 OMAP update

 > Hmm, yeah I'll see if I could group them a bit. The problem there
 > is that the patch series contains multiple rounds of "add and fix"
 > cycles. Pretty much all the non-dependant fixes have already been
 > applied, BTW.

I think it's nice to roll up fixes into patches that haven't been
merged upstream yet.  For example I try to avoid merging series like

  Add feature A
  Add feature B
  Fix 1 for feature A
  Fix 2 for feature A
  Fix for fix 1 for feature A

because that means I already knew the first patch was broken before it
ever got merged.  And it's better to avoid setting any more booby
traps for people trying to use git bisect or something like
that... enough bugs get merged by accident without us merging known
bugs.  So before I merge, I go back and create a new series like

  Add fixed feature A
  Add feature B

 - R.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/