[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210123092051.GT2696@kadam>
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 2021 12:20:51 +0300
From: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
To: Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@...il.com>
Cc: Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@...il.com>,
Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>,
linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org,
Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>,
Nathan Chancellor <natechancellor@...il.com>,
Clang-Built-Linux ML <clang-built-linux@...glegroups.com>,
Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
Ralf Ramsauer <ralf.ramsauer@...-regensburg.de>,
Pia Eichinger <pia.eichinger@...oth-regensburg.de>,
kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] MAINTAINERS: adjust to clang-version.sh removal
In networking then they want you to say which tree it applies to, but
it's not as simple as saying "net" vs "net-next". If it's a bugfix then
you should write that against "net" but if it's a clean up or a fix to a
recent change then it should be written against "net-next".
Also linux-next is not necessarily the same thing as net-next.
Networking patches should be written against either net or net-next, not
linux-next.
BPF tried to implement similar rules to they're not big enough to impose
their own rules. It's quite a big headache to try to figure out which
tree to use if you're like me and have no clue about bpf.
Anyway, the point of the net vs net-next is that devs are supposed to
figure out the exact tree and they're supposed to only write net-next if
it doesn't apply to net.
It's not clear to me the value of putting linux-next in the subject.
Doesn't everyone develop against the latest devel tree? Certainly I
can't imagine any maintainers doing extra work to try figure out the
date of the linux-next release. Surely, they just say "Doesn't apply to
foo-tree. Resend if necessary." That's the fastest and easiest
response when patches don't apply.
regards,
dan carpente
Powered by blists - more mailing lists