linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: Signed-off-by missing for commit in the drm-misc 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: <ZVXSjt_1uWHuYXsq@phenom.ffwll.local>
Date:   Thu, 16 Nov 2023 09:27:58 +0100
From:   Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>
To:     Maxime Ripard <mripard@...hat.com>
Cc:     Luben Tuikov <ltuikov89@...il.com>,
        Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch>,
        Intel Graphics <intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        DRI <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: Signed-off-by missing for commit in the drm-misc tree

On Thu, Nov 16, 2023 at 09:11:43AM +0100, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 14, 2023 at 06:46:21PM -0500, Luben Tuikov wrote:
> > On 2023-11-13 22:08, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > > BTW, cherry picking commits does not avoid conflicts - in fact it can
> > > cause conflicts if there are further changes to the files affected by
> > > the cherry picked commit in either the tree/branch the commit was
> > > cheery picked from or the destination tree/branch (I have to deal with
> > > these all the time when merging the drm trees in linux-next).  Much
> > > better is to cross merge the branches so that the patch only appears
> > > once or have a shared branches that are merged by any other branch that
> > > needs the changes.
> > > 
> > > I understand that things are not done like this in the drm trees :-(
> > 
> > Hi Stephen,
> > 
> > Thank you for the clarification--understood. I'll be more careful in the future.
> > Thanks again! :-)
> 
> In this case, the best thing to do would indeed have been to ask the
> drm-misc maintainers to merge drm-misc-fixes into drm-misc-next.
> 
> We're doing that all the time, but we're not ubiquitous so you need to
> ask us :)
> 
> Also, dim should have caught that when you pushed the branch. Did you
> use it?

Yeah dim must be used, exactly to avoid these issues. Both for applying
patches (so not git am directly, or cherry-picking from your own
development branch), and for pushing. The latter is even checked for by
the server (dim sets a special push flag which is very long and contains a
very clear warning if you bypass it).

If dim was used, this would be a bug in the dim script that we need to
fix.

Also backmerges (and in generally anything that is about cross-tree patch
wrangling, like cherry-picking) are maintainer duties in drm-misc and not
for committers:

https://drm.pages.freedesktop.org/maintainer-tools/maintainer-drm-misc.html#maintainer-s-duties

I think it'd be really good for Luben to go through the docs and supply a
patch to clarify this, if it's not clear from the existing docs.

We have some wording in the committer docs, but maybe it's not clear
enough:

https://drm.pages.freedesktop.org/maintainer-tools/committer-drm-misc.html#merge-criteria

"Any non-linear actions (backmerges, merging topic branches and sending
out pull requests) are only done by the official drm-misc maintainers (see
MAINTAINERS, or ask #dri-devel), and not by committers. See the examples
section in dim for more info"

Minor screw-ups like this gives us a great opportunity to improve the
tooling&docs, let's use it.

Cheers, Sima
-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch