linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: Fixes tag needs some work in the block 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: <20210126160156.GF10966@quack2.suse.cz>
Date:   Tue, 26 Jan 2021 17:01:56 +0100
From:   Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
To:     Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
Cc:     Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, Paolo Valente <paolo.valente@...aro.org>,
        Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        Jia Cheng Hu <jia.jiachenghu@...il.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: Fixes tag needs some work in the block tree

On Tue 26-01-21 08:47:55, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 1/26/21 6:29 AM, Jan Kara wrote:
> > On Mon 25-01-21 11:39:50, Jens Axboe wrote:
> >> On 1/25/21 11:35 AM, Paolo Valente wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> Il giorno 25 gen 2021, alle ore 10:40, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> ha scritto:
> >>>>
> >>>> Hi all,
> >>>>
> >>>> In commit
> >>>>
> >>>>  d4fc3640ff36 ("block, bfq: set next_rq to waker_bfqq->next_rq in waker injection")
> >>>>
> >>>> Fixes tag
> >>>>
> >>>>  Fixes: c5089591c3ba ("block, bfq: detect wakers and unconditionally inject their I/O")
> >>>>
> >>>> has these problem(s):
> >>>>
> >>>>  - Target SHA1 does not exist
> >>>>
> >>>> Maybe you meant
> >>>>
> >>>> Fixes: 13a857a4c4e8 ("block, bfq: detect wakers and unconditionally inject their I/O")
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> Hi Jens,
> >>> how to proceed in such a case (with patches already applied by you)?
> >>> Shall I send you a v2 with only this change?
> >>
> >> We just have to ignore it... But in the future, always double check that
> >> you are using the right shas, not some sha from an internal tree.
> > 
> > FWIW I have a commit hook in my git tree that just refuses a commit with
> > unknown Fixes tag SHA. Exactly to catch such mishaps in the patches I
> > merge...
> 
> That's not a bad idea, would help catch it upfront. Can you share the
> hook?

Sure, attached. Note that the hook just gets commit ID from the Fixes tag
and formats it with 12 commit ID digits and appropriate commit subject.

								Honza
-- 
Jan Kara <jack@...e.com>
SUSE Labs, CR

View attachment "commit-msg" of type "text/plain" (701 bytes)