| 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
| ||
|
Message-Id: <20150811.115249.1843804028134252781.davem@davemloft.net> Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2015 11:52:49 -0700 (PDT) From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> To: vivien.didelot@...oirfairelinux.com Cc: f.fainelli@...il.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel@...oirfairelinux.com, linux@...ck-us.net, andrew@...n.ch, sfeldma@...il.com, jiri@...nulli.us Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 0/7] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: support switchdev FDB objects From: Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...oirfairelinux.com> Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2015 14:18:42 -0400 (EDT) > On Aug 11, 2015, at 2:07 PM, David davem@...emloft.net wrote: > >> From: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com> >> Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2015 11:03:35 -0700 >> >>> Put differently, my question is how do you value not rewriting >>> history vs. breaking bisectability (by accident of course)? >> >> I never will rewrite history, ever. >> >> Too many people clone my tree and depend upon it. > > Sorry, I still don't understand. What are the consequences of: > > git revert -m 1 f1d5ca4 > > Then applying v3? In this scenerio I think a relative fixup works better. > You already did that in the past: > https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/1f2cd84 Each and every situation is evaluated by me on a case by case basis. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists