> From: Borislav Petkov <bp@xxxxxxxxx> > [...] > If I queue it after -rc1, it'll be only in tip and linux-next for an > additional 7 week cycle and I can always whack it if it breaks something. If > it doesn't, I can send it mainline in the 6.12 merge window. > > But we won't have to revert it mainline. > > See the difference? Got it. Thanks for the explanation! > If you're calling the difference between what I reverted and what you're > sending now unsubstantial: > > [...] I didn't expect that 'diff' could generate so many lines of changes :-) > especially for a patch which is already known to break things and where > we're especially careful, then yes, we strongly disagree here. > > So yes, it will definitely not go in now. Understood. > When version N introduces changes like above in what is already non- > trivial code, you drop all tags. And if people want to review it again, > then they should give you those R-by tags. > > Also, think about it: your patch broke a use case. How much are those R-by > tags worth if the patch is broken? And why do you want to hold on to > them so badly? > > If a patch needs to be reverted because it breaks a use case, all reviewed > and acked tags should simply be removed too. It is that simple. > > -- > Regards/Gruss, > Boris. Got it. Will reflect all the comments into the next version.
