linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] RCU changes for v6.17

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-=wh1Cjqv08fdm3T3ZSBGN2vhMm00Ud+JjbWthK0RygMF0Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2025 11:11:43 -0700
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Neeraj Upadhyay <Neeraj.Upadhyay@...nel.org>
Cc: paulmck@...nel.org, joelagnelf@...dia.com, frederic@...nel.org, 
	boqun.feng@...il.com, urezki@...il.com, qiang.zhang1211@...il.com, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-team@...a.com, rcu@...r.kernel.org, 
	Tze-nan.Wu@...iatek.com, a.sadovnikov@...ras.ru
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] RCU changes for v6.17

On Fri, 25 Jul 2025 at 19:46, Neeraj Upadhyay
<Neeraj.Upadhyay@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> This pull request contains the following branches:
>
> rcu-exp.23.07.2025 [..]

I've pulled this, but I do have a request (or two, really)..

The octopus merges look cool, but they have the problem that if there
are subtle bugs introduced by interactions between branches, they are
a pain to bisect. So in general, I advise people to avoid them.

But the *real* thing I note is that merges are more subtle than normal
commits in the first place, and octopus merges are subtler still - and
your have no explanation at all outside of the 'merge X Y and Z into
ABC'.

Please write more of a commit message explaining what those branches
*are* that you are merging.

Which is the second part of the request: when you ask me to merge "the
following branches", the branch names are basically line noise. I'm
not in the least interested in seeing what the date of a branch is.
That adds no value.

So can you please instead describe the branches by what they do than
by some internal branch name you used. I made up my own "names" for
the sub-branches in the merge message, but it would be much nicer if
you did it in the pull request.

So, for example, I changed "rcu-exp.23.07.2025" to be "Expedited grace
period", which seems to be what that branch name was cryptically
trying to say.

            Linus