Re: RISC-V for-next/fixes (cont'd from PW sync)

From: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
To: Alexandre Ghiti <alexghiti@rivosinc.com>
Cc: "Conor Dooley" <conor@kernel.org>,
	"Björn Töpel" <bjorn@kernel.org>,
	"Paul Walmsley" <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>,
	"Palmer Dabbelt" <palmer@dabbelt.com>,
	"Albert Ou" <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>,
	"Emil Renner Berthing" <kernel@esmil.dk>,
	"Samuel Holland" <samuel.holland@sifive.com>,
	"Björn Töpel" <bjorn@rivosinc.com>,
	linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org,
	"Andy Chiu" <andy.chiu@sifive.com>,
	"Jakub Kicinski" <kuba@kernel.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: RISC-V for-next/fixes (cont'd from PW sync)
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2024 07:27:57 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240329-fanning-woven-7dbb6cfdde9b@wendy> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHVXubgMTe83sYaNO+SG=90=k5scaQrpApveTCO163MhUc1tdA@mail.gmail.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1459 bytes --]

On Fri, Mar 29, 2024 at 07:46:38AM +0100, Alexandre Ghiti wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 27, 2024 at 9:32 PM Conor Dooley <conor@kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 27, 2024 at 08:57:50PM +0100, Björn Töpel wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I figured I'd put some words on the "how to update the RISC-V
> > > for-next/fixes branches [1]" that came up on the patchwork call today.
> > >
> > > In RISC-V land, the for-next branch is used for features, and typically
> > > sent as a couple of PRs to Linus when the merge window is open. The
> > > fixes branch is sent as PR(s) between the RCs of a release.
> > >
> > > Today, the baseline for for-next/fixes is the CURRENT_RELEASE-rc1, and
> > > features/fixes are based on that.
> > >
> > > This has IMO a couple of issues:
> > >
> > > 1. fixes is missing the non-RISC-V fixes from releases later than
> > >    -rc1, which makes it harder for contributors.
> 
> The syzbot report [1] requires fixes in mm [2], if we don't update
> fixes on top of the latest -rcX, we'll keep hitting this bug, so
> rebasing -fixes on top of the latest -rcX is necessary to me.

No non-ff rebasing of branches unless its 101% required, please. This
seems like a justifiable reason to merge the rc it appears in into the
riscv branches though.

> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-riscv/00000000000070a2660614b83885@google.com/T/#t
> [2] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240326063036.6242-1-osalvador@suse.de/

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 228 bytes --]