linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] bcachefs changes for 6.11

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-=wgmXpbFKmmk53c8Um7naf-AAwOGU-26RTHiafbGbostCA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2024 15:26:56 -0700
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@...ux.dev>
Cc: Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>, linux-bcachefs@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] bcachefs changes for 6.11

On Thu, 18 Jul 2024 at 15:24, Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@...ux.dev> wrote:
>
> Sorry, I must not have been clear. My master branch is a) not where I do
> development, and b) not not a branch that I will be sending to you -
> that's simply the primary branch I publish for people testing the latest
> bcachefs code.
>
> So: master will now be just updated by a hook on the server whenever I
> update for-next.

Oh, ok, then that's fine.

> > Now, if you want to do _additional_ testing along the lines of "what
> > happens with my branch and Linus' latest" then that is ok - but that
> > should be something you see as completely separate from testing your
> > own work.
>
> Yes, that's exactly what I was describing.

Good, sounds like we're on the same page.

            Linus