linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] x86/urgent for 6.1

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: <CAHk-=wj0afQB2odHZcfmtymR0q9wJEO8gGQo_Cob+KHgsimG5w@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Sun, 23 Oct 2022 10:06:37 -0700
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>
Cc:     x86-ml <x86@...nel.org>, lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] x86/urgent for 6.1

On Sun, Oct 23, 2022 at 2:54 AM Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de> wrote:
>
> Whoops, I mistyped the version in the tag. Lemme know if you need a
> properly renamed tag: x86_urgent_for_v6.1_rc2

Heh, no, it doesn't matter. As long as the pull request is unambiguous
(which is only really an issue at the end of the release window when I
start getting a mix of last-minute fixes, and early pull requests for
the next merge window), it's all good.

Nobody will look at the tag name afterwards, so the tag-name being a
bit odd doesn't really matter. In fact I often edit out the free-form
commentary in the form of "This pull request for version Xyz does.."
from merge commit messages people send me, because it's not relevant
or interesting in the history.

But hey, I appreciate the heads-up about the name mix-up (although,
again, the only time it tends to actually matter is for that
end-or-release time frame where there can be actual confusion).

                       Linus