linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/2] mmc: uniphier-sd: two bug-fixes

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: <CAPDyKFpAa=ucJvTLhNi-fQ3Fvd1in8rstxQouPY+_k_bFoAjZQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 15 Oct 2018 14:51:15 +0200
From:   Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>
To:     Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>
Cc:     Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>,
        linux-mmc <linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org>,
        Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@...g-engineering.com>,
        linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] mmc: uniphier-sd: two bug-fixes

On 15 October 2018 at 09:33, Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de> wrote:
>
>> Some sub-systems rebase, and some do not.
>> It is up to the sub-system maintainer.
>
> We used to have a very strict rule to not rebase anything which ends up
> in linux-next. Dunno what happened to this rule but I liked it.
>
>> I know what you are saying, but this is how we develop in linux-next.
>
> I wonder about that...
>
>> You need to use "git rebase --onto".
>
> And what about lists with commit IDs tracking patches on their way
> upstream? Yes, there is git-patch-id, yet I think it is easier to admit
> that incremental changes happen anyway. I know Ulf view differs...
>

For this particular case I can avoid the re-base, as you prefer.
However, in general can't commit to not rebase, as it depends on case
by case basis.

Kind regards
Uffe