| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <55CA38F7.4010105@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2015 11:03:35 -0700 From: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com> To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, vivien.didelot@...oirfairelinux.com CC: netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel@...oirfairelinux.com, linux@...ck-us.net, andrew@...n.ch, sfeldma@...il.com, jiri@...nulli.us Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 0/7] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: support switchdev FDB objects On 11/08/15 10:38, David Miller wrote: > From: Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...oirfairelinux.com> > Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2015 12:25:06 -0400 (EDT) > >> I can work on fixup patches to restore v3 changes on top of v2, but this >> won't fix the bisectability issue. >> >> Instead of fixing individual portions, reverting the merge commit >> f1d5ca4: "Merge branch 'mv88e6xxx-switchdev-fdb'" would undo all the v2 >> series at once, then v3 can be merged on top of it. >> >> Can you consider this as an option? > > Nothing will fix bisectability, so don't try. > > Reverting an entire series when you have the fix available > already is excessive. > > So as I have already asked you, send a relative fixup to clear > up this situation. What if the fix is to actually not break bisectability? Put differently, my question is how do you value not rewriting history vs. breaking bisectability (by accident of course)? -- Florian -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists