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: <CAPcyv4jtNXhMwCqpbKkHe5e-nDPK+2Wq=maFsB_SMSGyg7fw5w@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 9 May 2018 09:04:31 -0700
From:   Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
To:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc:     Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, "w@....eu" <w@....eu>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "ksummit-discuss@...ts.linuxfoundation.org" 
        <ksummit-discuss@...ts.linuxfoundation.org>,
        Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        linux-nvdimm <linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org>
Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] bug-introducing patches

On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 3:47 AM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
> On Wed, 9 May 2018 18:03:46 +0900 Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 10:47:57AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
>> > On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 10:44 AM, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org> wrote:
>>
>> > > I think this is an excellent idea, copying in Stephen for his input.
>> > > I'm currently on holiday but unless someone convinces me it's a terrible
>> > > idea I'm willing to at least give it a go on a trial basis once I'm back
>> > > home.
>>
>> > Since Stephen merges all -fixes branches first, before merging all the
>> > -next branches, he already generates that as part of linux-next. All
>> > he'd need to do is push that intermediate state out to some
>> > linux-fixes branch for consumption by test bots.
>
> Good idea ... I will see what I can do.
>
>> True.  It's currently only those -fixes branches that people have asked
>> him to merge separately which isn't as big a proportion of trees as have
>> them (perhaps fortunately given people's enthusiasm for fixes branches
>> that don't merge cleanly with their development branches) so we'd also
>> need to encourage people to add them separately.
>
> I currently have 44 such fixes branches.  More welcome!

Please add:

    git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/nvdimm/nvdimm.git
libnvdimm-fixes

We currently merge this into libnvdimm-for-next for -next coverage,
and resolve any conflicts vs new development. Do you want to see those
conflicts? Otherwise I would recommend only pulling libnvdimm-for-next
for -next and libnvdimm-fixes for this new -next-fixes effort.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ