netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] docs: netdev: clarify the need to sending reverts as patches

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: <7975a642-965b-81c7-d0e7-21e499b152ea@gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 27 Mar 2023 12:19:14 -0700
From:   Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, davem@...emloft.net
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, edumazet@...gle.com, pabeni@...hat.com,
        corbet@....net, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] docs: netdev: clarify the need to sending
 reverts as patches

On 3/27/23 10:26, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> We don't state explicitly that reverts need to be submitted
> as a patch. It occasionally comes up.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
> ---
> CC: corbet@....net
> CC: linux-doc@...r.kernel.org
> ---
>   Documentation/process/maintainer-netdev.rst | 9 ++++++++-
>   1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/process/maintainer-netdev.rst b/Documentation/process/maintainer-netdev.rst
> index e31d7a951073..f6983563ff06 100644
> --- a/Documentation/process/maintainer-netdev.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/process/maintainer-netdev.rst
> @@ -184,11 +184,18 @@ Handling misapplied patches
>   
>   Occasionally a patch series gets applied before receiving critical feedback,
>   or the wrong version of a series gets applied.
> -There is no revert possible, once it is pushed out, it stays like that.
> +
> +Making the patch disappear once it is pushed out is not possible, the commit
> +history in netdev trees is stable.

I would write immutable instead of stable here to convey the idea that 
there are no history rewrites once the tree is pushed out. With that:

Reviewed-by: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
-- 
Florian