linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: Fixes tags needs some work in the sound-asoc tree

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: <14195fe3-14b2-eb80-3409-f7ca817b95f5@linux.intel.com>
Date:   Thu, 16 Apr 2020 07:55:20 -0500
From:   Pierre-Louis Bossart <pierre-louis.bossart@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
        Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>
Cc:     Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Bard Liao <yung-chuan.liao@...ux.intel.com>,
        Daniel Baluta <daniel.baluta@....com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: Fixes tags needs some work in the sound-asoc tree



On 4/15/20 6:41 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> In commit
> 
>    101001652ee7 ("ASoC: SOF: topology: fix: handle DAI widget connections properly with multiple CPU DAI's")
> 
> Fixes tag
> 
>    Fixes: 4a7e26a4d833 ("ASoC: SOF: topology: connect dai widget to all
> 
> has these problem(s):
> 
>    - Target SHA1 does not exist
> 
> Maybe you meant
> 
> Fixes: c59aca98c912 ("ASoC: SOF: topology: connect dai widget to all cpu-dais")
> 
> Also, please do not split Fixes tags over more than one line and keep
> all the commit message tags together at the end of the commit message.

Sorry about that. I always run checkpatch.pl and didn't see an error

../patches/20200415/0001-ASoC-SOF-topology-fix-handle-DAI-widget-connections-.patch
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
total: 0 errors, 0 warnings, 0 checks, 49 lines checked

My theory is that the SHA1 check is fooled by our use of worktrees. This 
SHA1 does exist but on another SOF development branch. Is there a way to 
restrict the checks only to the base upstream branch, e.g. Mark's 
for-5.8 branch?

If not, we probably need to make sure we have a separate directory just 
for upstreaming, to avoid any pollution from SOF branches?

Thanks
-Pierre