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 13:00:47 +0100
From:   Maxime Ripard <mripard@...hat.com>
To:     Luben Tuikov <ltuikov89@...il.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

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

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (229 bytes)