CC'ing kernel newbies for anyone else trying to learn how linux-next works. On Fri, Jul 06, 2018 at 11:49:51AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
On Fri, 6 Jul 2018 23:42:13 +0900 Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com> wrote:
On (07/06/18 15:47), Arnd Bergmann wrote: [..]
Fixes: bfe80ed3d7c7 ("vsprintf: add command line option debug_boot_weak_hash")
Seems like this one is still in linux-next. Can we squash this patch and bfe80ed3d7c7?
I prefer not to do squashes unless absolutely necessary. Yes, it is in next, but even branches pulled into next should try to resist rebasing (I never rebase my next branch unless there is a real bug that will break bisecting).
Steve if you do not rebase your next branch and the branch ends up containing fixes to patches like the above doesn't this mean that when you do a pull request to Linus the branch you are asking to be pulled will be too 'dirty' i.e. I thought that the pull request should be like a patch set and only contain the 'final product' not every change that was made during development? I was under the impression that each maintainer constantly rebased their next branches and that was why one has to checkout the tagged linux-next each day instead of just pulling. From information on the net somewhere I have been checking out linux-next using this shell function checkout-next () { local branch='linux-next' git checkout master git remote update linux-next git branch -D $branch git checkout -b $branch $(git tag -l "next-*" | tail -1) } Also, when my leaks tree got included in linux-next I was told that it was ok to rebase and have since been rebasing mercilessly. thanks in advance for your time, Tobin.