linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the rcu tree with the tip 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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20220406162821.GM4285@paulmck-ThinkPad-P17-Gen-1>
Date:   Wed, 6 Apr 2022 09:28:21 -0700
From:   "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>
To:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@....com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the rcu tree with the tip tree

On Wed, Apr 06, 2022 at 12:45:03PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the rcu tree got conflicts in:
> 
>   kernel/sched/core.c
>   include/linux/sched.h
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   cfe43f478b79 ("preempt/dynamic: Introduce preemption model accessors")
> 
> from the tip tree and commit:
> 
>   42e3e3c6a774 ("EXP preempt/dynamic: Introduce preempt mode accessors")
> 
> from the rcu tree.
> 
> Well, this is just a pain.  Paul, please don't put expierimental things
> in you linuc-nect included branch.  I have dropped the rcu tree today.

Gah!  Please accept my apologies for the hassle!

In the short term, I have reset rcu/next to the commit preceding
42e3e3c6a774 ("EXP preempt/dynamic: Introduce preempt mode accessors").
This could cause some trouble for a few corner-case -next users, but...

Longer term, this is excellent news, because it means that I can drop
that commit from my tree entirely and rebase my stack on top of the
version of that same commit that is just now in -tip.

> The rules I use for the linux-next tree are:
> 
> "You will need to ensure that the patches/commits in your tree/series have
> been:
>      * submitted under GPL v2 (or later) and include the Contributor's
>         Signed-off-by,
>      * posted to the relevant mailing list,
>      * reviewed by you (or another maintainer of your subsystem tree),
>      * successfully unit tested, and 
>      * destined for the current or next Linux merge window.
> 
> Basically, this should be just what you would send to Linus (or ask him
> to fetch).  It is allowed to be rebased if you deem it necessary."

Understood, and thank you.

The next time that I am forced to choose between propagating a bug into
-next on the one hand and precisely following the above rules on the
other, I will consult with you beforehand.  Please accept my apologies
for failing to have done so this time.

							Thanx, Paul