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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <8826c01f-aad1-473e-8e0c-001f1d163d8c@gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 24 Nov 2023 17:08:58 -0500
From:   Luben Tuikov <ltuikov89@...il.com>
To:     Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@...ux.intel.com>,
        Maxime Ripard <mripard@...hat.com>
Cc:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        Intel Graphics <intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        DRI <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: Signed-off-by missing for commit in the drm-misc tree

On 2023-11-24 08:20, Jani Nikula wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Nov 2023, Luben Tuikov <ltuikov89@...il.com> wrote:
>> 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.
> 
> Wait what?
> 
> What do you mean by forcing the commit in? Bypass dim?
> 
> If yes, please *never* do that when you're dealing with dim managed
> branches. That's part of the deal for getting commit access, along with
> following all the other maintainer tools documentation.

Hi Jani,

I only use dim, ever.
-- 
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)