linux-kernel - git process question

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20170414180547.182f859c@gandalf.local.home>
Date:   Fri, 14 Apr 2017 18:05:47 -0400
From:   Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: git process question

Hi Linus,

I have a minor bug I found and a fix for it. I'm currently putting it
through the grind and will send it to you for this rc release cycle.

Here's the question. My current linux-next development depends on this
fix. I already posted work to linux-next and do not want to rebase.
Would it be OK to cherry pick this change that I send to you, which
will be based on a commit in your tree, into my development branch
where I can continue the work on top of the previous development that's
in linux-next and the fix?

The commit I cherry pick will just evaporate into git mist when you
pull my development branch in the next merge window, as git does the
distilling of commits that are identical. But I want to make sure you
are OK with this plan before I head out and do this.

The alternatives are,

 1) Rebase my current work in linux-next and retest everything from
   scratch. I really don't like doing this.

 2) Merge the development and urgent branches and continue working on
    that. But I understand that you really don't like it when people do
    that.

Thoughts?

-- Steve