linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] Please pull NFS client changes for 5.14

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: <448e0f2b96b7fa85f1dd520b39a24747ea9487ed.camel@hammerspace.com>
Date:   Fri, 9 Jul 2021 16:55:15 +0000
From:   Trond Myklebust <trondmy@...merspace.com>
To:     "torvalds@...ux-foundation.org" <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
CC:     "linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org" <linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Please pull NFS client changes for 5.14

On Fri, 2021-07-09 at 09:51 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 8, 2021 at 11:16 AM Trond Myklebust
> <trondmy@...merspace.com> wrote:
> > 
> > Please note that this branch was rebased today. The reason was I
> > discovered
> > that one of the topic branches that was merged contained some
> > duplicated patches
> > from the main branch (mea culpa). So the rebase simply removed
> > those duplicates
> > from the topic branch.
> 
> Please don't rebase just for pointless details like this.
> 
> Duplicate patches aren't a problem, and we have them all the time.
> 
> Yes, they can cause annoying merge conflicts (not on their own -
> identical patches will merge just fine - but if there are then
> *other*
> changes to the same area). But it's seldom all that big of a deal,
> and
> if there's just a couple of duplicates, then rebasing is much _worse_
> than the fix.
> 
> If there were *tons* of duplicate patches, and you have some workflow
> issue, that's one thing - and then you need to fix the workflow. But
> particularly for just a couple of patches, rebasing and losing all
> the
> testing is really entirely the wrong thing to do.
> 
> In other words: only rebase for *catastrophic* stuff. Only yo fix
> things that are actively broken. Not for some minor technical issue.
> 
> I've pulled this, but please avoid this in the future.
> 
>                Linus

Thanks! It didn't result in any overall code changes or even changes to
the result of the merges. However if you're OK with the occasional
duplicate patch then I'll make sure to avoid this in the future.

-- 
Trond Myklebust
Linux NFS client maintainer, Hammerspace
trond.myklebust@...merspace.com