On Tue, 2017-07-18 at 11:24 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 8:51 AM, Doug Ledford <dledford@xxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
> >
> > This is the first round of fixes for the -rc cycle.
>
> Pulled. However, I want to complain (again!) about bad merge commits.
>
> You're not the only one doing this, so this is not rdma-specific, but
> I complain when I notice.
>
> There's a merge commit in there that has no explanation. This is the
> totality of the commit message:
>
> Merge tag 'v4.13-rc1' into k.o/for-4.13-rc
>
> Linux v4.13-rc1
>
> and I want to point out that there is *nothing* there that explains
> why that merge exists.
Fair enough. My branch still had two unpulled commits and was based on
v4.12-rc3. But, you had already taken the SELinux/RDMA patches through
the SELinux tree during this merge window, and two of the fix patches
in my pull request would have produced conflicts for you if I didn't
merge up to a common ancestor that had the SELinux/RDMA patches prior
to applying those patches to my tree (these two in particular):
f7c8f2e9ddc7 IB/uverbs: Make use of ib_modify_qp variant to avoid
resolving DMAC
a512c2fbef9c IB/core: Introduce modify QP operation with udata
So I didn't want to abandon the branch with those commits in them,
hence I did the forward merge and then proceeded with applying the
commits for you to pull.
> A merge? There *has* to be an explanation for why the merge exists.
> What problem did that merge fix? Why was it done in the first palce?
>
> And if the only reason for that merge is "sync with upstream", then
> no, that is not a sufficient reason. It has to have an actual real
> reason, and it needs to be stated.
Does this apply to the for-next area as well? In particular, I was
planning on changing my process so that my for-next branch would
regularly sync with tagged rc releases (I believe this is what Dave
Miller does with his tree, or else he's getting updates to later -rcs
by pulling from other people, but I know I see merge commits for your
-rc releases in his history when I go scanning through it). This is
how I intended to get the -rc fixes I send you into my for-next area so
that for-next development is against the RDMA subsystem as it exists
including the -rc fixes, and not as it existed when I branched off the
for-next branch. I can merge my -rc branch instead if that is
preferred, and only merge the -rcs if I need one for a specific out-of-
RDMA area feature for building against.
--
Doug Ledford <dledford@xxxxxxxxxx>
GPG KeyID: B826A3330E572FDD
Key fingerprint = AE6B 1BDA 122B 23B4 265B 1274 B826 A333 0E57 2FDD
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
