linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/8] FPGA DFL Changes for 5.12

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: <X/xmi/jJmDHnV5/N@kroah.com>
Date:   Mon, 11 Jan 2021 15:54:03 +0100
From:   Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Tom Rix <trix@...hat.com>
Cc:     Moritz Fischer <mdf@...nel.org>,
        "linux-fpga@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fpga@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, moritzf@...gle.com,
        Rikard Falkeborn <rikard.falkeborn@...il.com>,
        Zheng Yongjun <zhengyongjun3@...wei.com>,
        Russ Weight <russell.h.weight@...el.com>,
        "Gerlach, Matthew" <matthew.gerlach@...el.com>,
        Sonal Santan <sonal.santan@...inx.com>,
        Xu Yilun <yilun.xu@...el.com>,
        Richard Gong <richard.gong@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] FPGA DFL Changes for 5.12

On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 06:40:24AM -0800, Tom Rix wrote:
> 
> On 1/10/21 10:57 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Sun, Jan 10, 2021 at 11:43:54AM -0800, Tom Rix wrote:
> >> On 1/10/21 9:05 AM, Moritz Fischer wrote:
> >>> Tom,
> >>>
> >>> On Sun, Jan 10, 2021 at 07:46:29AM -0800, Tom Rix wrote:
> >>>> On 1/7/21 8:09 AM, Tom Rix wrote:
> >>>>> On 1/6/21 8:37 PM, Moritz Fischer wrote:
> >>>>>> This is a resend of the previous (unfortunately late) patchset of
> >>>>>> changes for FPGA DFL.
> >>>>> Is there something I can do to help ?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I am paid to look after linux-fpga, so i have plenty of time.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Some ideas of what i am doing now privately i can do publicly.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 1. keep linux-fpga sync-ed to greg's branch so linux-fpga is normally in a pullable state.
> >>> Is it not? It currently points to v5.11-rc1. If I start applying patches
> >>> that require the changes that went into Greg's branch I can merge.
> >> I mean the window between when we have staged patches and when they go into Greg's branch.
> >>
> >> We don't have any now, maybe those two trival ones.
> >>
> >> Since Greg's branch moves much faster than ours, our staging branch needs to be rebased regularly until its merge.
> > Ick, no!  NEVER rebase a public branch.  Why does it matter the speed of
> > my branch vs. anyone elses?  Git handles merges very well.
> >
> > Just like Linus's branches move much faster than mine, and I don't
> > rebase my branches, you shouldn't rebase yours.
> >
> > Becides, I'm only taking _PATCHES_ for fpga changes at the moment, no
> > git pulls, so why does it matter at all for any of this?
> >
> > What is the problem you are trying to solve here?
> 
> This 5.12 fpga patchset not making it into 5.11.

Ok, but isn't it the responsibility of the submitter to make sure they
apply properly when sending them out?

> At some point before the 5.11 window, I tried it on next and it failed to merge.
> 
> This points to needing some c/i so it does not happen again.

"again"?  Merges and the like are a totally normal thing and happen all
the time, I still fail to understand what you are trying to "solve" for
here...

thanks,

greg k-h