linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] arch/microblaze patches for 5.6-rc1

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 4 Feb 2020 22:04:25 +0000
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     Michal Simek <monstr@...str.eu>
Cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] arch/microblaze patches for 5.6-rc1

On Tue, Feb 4, 2020 at 5:37 PM Michal Simek <monstr@...str.eu> wrote:
>
> Sorry about it. All that patches has been sent and done till the mid of
> January. Some of them even earlier.
> I just needed to remove one patch from queue which we found is causing
> the issue. That's why instead of revert I completely remove it and
> rebase the rest of the tree.
> I will handle that differently next time.

Note that if this happens again, and you have a really good reason to
rebase, please _mention_ that reason.

The whole taking me by surprise when I notice after-the-fact that I've
pulled something that was committed just hours before is about the
worst thing that can happen (always excepting obviously untested code
- me finding that the code doesn't even compile is even worse, of
course, even if it wasn't recently committed).

So if there's a good reason why something is very recent, and you
mention it, and it's not a common pattern, I get much less upset.

              Linus