On 1/14/22 22:54, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Fri, Jan 14, 2022 at 7:59 AM Damien Le Moal > <damien.lemoal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> ATA changes for 5.17-rc1 > > A number of these commits are not in linux-next. Why? That is strange. I have kept my for-next branch in sync with for-5.17 all the time and got several built-bot warnings that I addressed. > It looks like you have rebased things very recently (and looks like > you did it a week ago too). Or maybe some patch-queue system, or > whatever. Why? If it hasn't been in linux-next, you should explain > what's up. The last intentional rebase on 5.16-rc8 of the for-5.17 branch was to check that there were no conflicts nor any problems with the fixes in 5.16. I did that because Hannes series touched a lot of drivers (if not most of them). I am not sure why the patches do not show up in linux-next. As mentioned above, since I got several build-bot warnings, I am confident that this went through build tests and passes. Or am I missing something in the workflow ? Stephen, I am almost certain that you are pulling patches from libata for-next branch since I got build bot reports and you also pinged me directly about these. Is there something I am missing about linux-next ? Is there some other request I need to send to someone to get patches pulled there too ? I was under the assumption that your pulls end up creating linux-next... > As it is, I'm traveling, and I'm just throwing this away because I > don't want things that haven't seen the build testing that linux-next > does, since on my laptop I cannot do as much build testing as I > normally do. Understood. I will get this sorted. > > Linus -- Damien Le Moal Western Digital Research
