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]

Date:   Wed, 22 Nov 2023 17:49:54 -0500
From:   Luben Tuikov <ltuikov89@...il.com>
To:     Maxime Ripard <mripard@...hat.com>
Cc:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        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 2023-11-22 07:00, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> Hi Luben,
> 
> On Thu, Nov 16, 2023 at 09:27:58AM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
>> 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.
> 
> It would be very useful for you to explain what happened here so we
> improve the tooling or doc and can try to make sure it doesn't happen
> again
> 
> Maxime

There is no problem with the tooling--I just forced the commit in.
-- 
Regards,
Luben

Download attachment "OpenPGP_0x4C15479431A334AF.asc" of type "application/pgp-keys" (665 bytes)

Download attachment "OpenPGP_signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (237 bytes)