linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] ARM: mstar for v5.14 v2

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAOesGMiu2+dN0_q7X_5p3pc-Lz=SMGiaRQkOBag+dqH2tatZgg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 15 Jun 2021 09:03:24 -0700
From:   Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>
To:     Daniel Palmer <daniel@...f.com>
Cc:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, SoC Team <soc@...nel.org>,
        linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Romain Perier <romain.perier@...il.com>,
        Mohammed Billoo <mohammed.billoo@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] ARM: mstar for v5.14 v2

On Tue, Jun 15, 2021 at 9:01 AM Daniel Palmer <daniel@...f.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Olof,
>
> On Wed, 16 Jun 2021 at 00:31, Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net> wrote:
> > This time it seems like you based your branch on 5.14-rc5, which is a newer -rc
> > than what we have the rest of our trees on. The general rule of thumb is to
> > base it on the oldest meaningful rc for the release (rc1 or rc2, most of the
> > time). We normally base our tree on rc2 or so, in this case I went forward to
> > rc3 earlier.
>
> Sorry, I hadn't even thought of that but it makes sense.
>
> > (Maybe you had the same base last time around, and I missed it -- my tooling
> > failed out on the S-o-b checking before I noticed)
>
> Last one was rc5 too.
>
> > To avoid another roundtrip here, I'll apply the two patches directly, but
> > please keep it in mind in the future, especially once you have more material
> > for a cycle.
>
> Thanks for doing that and the hand holding. I think I can manage to
> get it right next time. :)

Yeah, no worries. More or less every single maintainer has made
similar mistakes at some point or other, especially during ramping up.

> I have one DTS patch I would like to get into 5.14 for the watchdog
> driver that was recently accepted.
> Is it still ok to send a PR for that one or is it too late now? I
> think I read the cut off is around rc6.

You can still send it, either as a patch or as a pull request - your choice.


-Olof