From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42C45C2BA19 for ; Sat, 11 Apr 2020 04:04:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03C3420757 for ; Sat, 11 Apr 2020 04:04:21 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel-dk.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.i=@kernel-dk.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.b="O3EvBYAe" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1725835AbgDKEEU (ORCPT ); Sat, 11 Apr 2020 00:04:20 -0400 Received: from mail-pf1-f194.google.com ([209.85.210.194]:46239 "EHLO mail-pf1-f194.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725798AbgDKEEU (ORCPT ); Sat, 11 Apr 2020 00:04:20 -0400 Received: by mail-pf1-f194.google.com with SMTP id q3so1880724pff.13 for ; Fri, 10 Apr 2020 21:04:20 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel-dk.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=nQvMpukNO/jhSN1Dfak56wDogQyph8/YlqBe2s+q9Yo=; b=O3EvBYAecnfGImdmby4Qbt1ENjJpYMO1t7rXq9OZY79NJKUbUUBgAlo7wZQaB5UsuU 9EO+RQSuSYnaJq6jHkcsEOUXBy501G7w0yIDDV3S0+yQ4TXRJB+2eTQAV4EjUze12zrV wUBIFFQUQpweYQVW9eFUa1mMMYm/NePxY68LaOfz/uabXINOnymYOWiMnNw1coesnI2P 02KGPRxFunnFGF47J6a/5Kc2L6vqBh8K0RT+wdXD9anX11YYVcNUhrRBfYmzcIryxxeQ s8NGkL80WfxnxrPN0165CZ/gFujs5sZYNcaIn1w2dXNUozVuytKtd9D/ycpKUoutm2nL oWBQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=nQvMpukNO/jhSN1Dfak56wDogQyph8/YlqBe2s+q9Yo=; b=Vk4+388HcebGqQx9mukmQBjsaxZcfAQdcESADE9e4E+5UlWYT6r5L7mvp67ZQR894W OP6YNBO8AyqguauMtF/nS2Z77oAwW9Os+0fUtVTyds/dbpQALQOaf93eRcU4GyHtCL7H +0fumX6QsdaN8+HN6WcDfpbKxfifvl/7G0x+RwABbuLMc92hgXrG1wQmIE9vGKjXbL1U ZXIgIgezByreLhtdoEEP/KGknogMgQG8uty+yepJRTDI2iE8UMSNsOypmoZ3mSVUKsVq Mn+r7nhWnovyVVdgmhW8oDZ3TJVGmWX01Yo7ngeAQE324KOt8TEXshDRtdTUDqeoYllP pT8w== X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0Pua+sH/xJoMTtwEgMb7KIRuQicw73DCIlplmWG0rzDrVT4sCqDFR W8WM9nyyEXY0/Bx+ypwwxAq997EcfcpIQg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypJfXSCbRhZy/l+M2iD7TFSquu/abK+hhf3qBU/xl1QNKGr9Ok0ZTvvwvi9q5rQEcPfTeQ9jrg== X-Received: by 2002:a62:2783:: with SMTP id n125mr8598113pfn.133.1586577859189; Fri, 10 Apr 2020 21:04:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.188] ([66.219.217.145]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id i124sm3064826pfg.14.2020.04.10.21.04.17 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 10 Apr 2020 21:04:18 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Block fixes for 5.7-rc1 To: Linus Torvalds Cc: "linux-block@vger.kernel.org" References: <0d580c9a-be04-0b48-0594-17a0339df1b5@kernel.dk> <5b4a4f64-3a39-e1a6-6141-60436bb9249b@kernel.dk> From: Jens Axboe Message-ID: <9686fd16-126a-4f52-e7c8-832991fb98bb@kernel.dk> Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2020 22:04:16 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.4.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-block-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-block@vger.kernel.org On 4/10/20 10:25 AM, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Fri, Apr 10, 2020 at 7:37 AM Jens Axboe wrote: >> >> This one sits on top of the previous, figured that was easier than >> redoing the other one fully. > > It's actually easier for me if you remove the broken tag when you > notice things like this (or use the same name for the fix tag and just > force-update it). > > And then send a "oops, me bad, I updated it" with the new pull data. > > The reason: when I opened this thread, I didn't notice your follow-up > at first, so I pulled the old tag, and so got the known-broken code. > > And yes, I double-checked and caught it, unpulled and then re-pulled > the fixed-up tag instead. > > But if the wrong tag had been just overwritten or deleted, the extra > steps wouldn't have been necessary. > > Not a huge deal, it's not like it took me a lot of effort (it's more > painful if I have to fix up conflicts twice, although even that isn't > usually much of a bother since the second time I don't have to really > analyze them again). > > So just a heads up for "I wish you'd done X instead". Noted! Since I sent out this pull yesterday and I knew I'd be away from a keyborad all day today, I had to rush this followup pull this morning. Normally I probably would have killed the branch and sent a new one. Thanks for doing the right thing, and just pulling the new tag instead. > Btw, on the subject of "I wish you had done X": this is not at all > particular to you, and a lot of people do this, but pull requests tend > to have the same pattern that we are trying to discourage in patch > descriptions. > > So in Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst, we talk about this: > > "Describe your changes in imperative mood, e.g. "make xyzzy do frotz" > instead of "[This patch] makes xyzzy do frotz" or "[I] changed xyzzy > to do frotz", as if you are giving orders to the codebase to change > its behaviour" > > because once it's then accepted into git, the whole "this patch" kind > of language doesn't really make much sense. It's much better to just > describe what the change does, than say "this change does X". > > The same is actually true when I merge your pull request, and I take > the description from your email. Because the same way "This patch does > X" does not make a regular commit message any more legible, the "This > pull request does X" does not make sense in the commit message of a > merge. > > So I end up editing peoples messages a lot (and I occasionally forget > or miss it). > > Again, this is _not_ a huge deal, and I obviously haven't made a stink > about it, but I thought I'd mention it since I was on the subject of > "this causes me extra work". I like it, I'll word my pull requests imperatively going forward. -- Jens Axboe