On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 8:11 PM Dave Airlie <airlied@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, 10 Mar 2021 at 17:48, Maxime Ripard <maxime@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Hi Dave, > > > > On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 09:50:29AM +1000, Dave Airlie wrote: > > > I'm mostly sending this to the -misc maintainers because > > > drm-misc-fixes is based on rc1 at present. > > > > > > This needs to be *rebased* not merged up to 5.12-rc2. Merging will > > > still have the bad landmine commits in the bisect history. This is a > > > very special case. > > > > I'm sorry, I'm not entirely sure I get this. -rc1 is still in the -rc2 > > history, so how would that change anything in the bisect history? > > > > We can't get rid of the bad commit range, we can reduce the amount of > times someone accidentally bisects into it, by not using it as a base > commit for future changes. > > If in the future a bisect happens to want to test one of the patches > in drm-misc-fixes that is based on rc1, it will land the user with an > rc1 test kernel and could eat their swapfile/disk. We can avoid that > problem by not using rc1 as a base for drm-misc-fixes. > > We can't avoid them bisecting into the broken commits between when > this landed and was fixed, but rebasing trees can minimise the chances > of this when bisecting other changesets. Same for backmerge, backmerge -rc2, not -rc1. I think there's a request for backmerge pending from Noralf anyway. Also for any topic branch and all that. -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
