On Fri, Mar 29, 2024 at 07:46:38AM +0100, Alexandre Ghiti wrote: > On Wed, Mar 27, 2024 at 9:32 PM Conor Dooley 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/