linux-next: Fixes tag needs some work in the bpf-next tree

linux-next: Fixes tag needs some work in the bpf-next tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 430 bytes --]

Hi all,

In commit

  a50cbac6d81a ("selftests/bpf: Fix tunnel remote IP comments")

Fixes tag

  Fixes: 933a741e ("selftests/bpf: bpf tunnel test.")

has these problem(s):

  - SHA1 should be at least 12 digits long
    This can be fixed for the future by setting core.abbrev to 12 (or
    more) or (for git v2.11 or later) just making sure it is not set
    (or set to "auto").

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

linux-next: Fixes tag needs some work in the bpf-next tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 366 bytes --]

Hi all,

In commit

  2e5e0e8ede02 ("bpf: Fix reference state management for synchronous callbacks")

Fixes tag

  Fixes: 69c87ba6225 ("bpf: Add bpf_for_each_map_elem() helper")

has these problem(s):

  - Target SHA1 does not exist

Maybe you meant

Fixes: 69c087ba6225 ("bpf: Add bpf_for_each_map_elem() helper")

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: Fixes tag needs some work in the bpf-next tree

[Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi]

On Wed, 24 Aug 2022 at 07:00, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> In commit
>
>   2e5e0e8ede02 ("bpf: Fix reference state management for synchronous callbacks")
>
> Fixes tag
>
>   Fixes: 69c87ba6225 ("bpf: Add bpf_for_each_map_elem() helper")
>
> has these problem(s):
>
>   - Target SHA1 does not exist
>
> Maybe you meant
>
> Fixes: 69c087ba6225 ("bpf: Add bpf_for_each_map_elem() helper")
>

Ugh, really sorry, I must have fat fingered and pressed 'x' in vim
while editing the commit message. I always generate these using a git
fixes alias.

> --
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell

Re: linux-next: Fixes tag needs some work in the bpf-next tree

[Alexei Starovoitov]

On Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 10:05 AM Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
<memxor@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 24 Aug 2022 at 07:00, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > In commit
> >
> >   2e5e0e8ede02 ("bpf: Fix reference state management for synchronous callbacks")
> >
> > Fixes tag
> >
> >   Fixes: 69c87ba6225 ("bpf: Add bpf_for_each_map_elem() helper")
> >
> > has these problem(s):
> >
> >   - Target SHA1 does not exist
> >
> > Maybe you meant
> >
> > Fixes: 69c087ba6225 ("bpf: Add bpf_for_each_map_elem() helper")
> >
>
> Ugh, really sorry, I must have fat fingered and pressed 'x' in vim
> while editing the commit message. I always generate these using a git
> fixes alias.

Since that was caught quickly there weren't that many commits on top.
Fixed and force pushed bpf-next.

We actually have a script that checks such sha-s. Not sure how we missed it.

linux-next: Fixes tag needs some work in the bpf-next tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 376 bytes --]

Hi all,

In commit

  76ea8f9e0003 ("selftests/bpf: Workaround strict bpf_lsm return value check.")

Fixes tag

  Fixes: af980eb89f06 ("bpf, lsm: Add check for BPF LSM return value")

has these problem(s):

  - Target SHA1 does not exist

Maybe you meant

Fixes: 5d99e198be27 ("bpf, lsm: Add check for BPF LSM return value")

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: Fixes tag needs some work in the bpf-next tree

[Andrii Nakryiko]

On Mon, Jul 29, 2024 at 2:50 PM Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> In commit
>
>   76ea8f9e0003 ("selftests/bpf: Workaround strict bpf_lsm return value check.")
>
> Fixes tag
>
>   Fixes: af980eb89f06 ("bpf, lsm: Add check for BPF LSM return value")
>
> has these problem(s):
>
>   - Target SHA1 does not exist
>
> Maybe you meant
>
> Fixes: 5d99e198be27 ("bpf, lsm: Add check for BPF LSM return value")

Yes, you are right, I missed updating the sha during bpf-next rebase.
Thanks for the heads up, I just updated and force-pushed the
bpf-next/for-next tag.

>
> --
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell

linux-next: Fixes tag needs some work in the bpf-next tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 422 bytes --]

Hi all,

In commit

  c721d8f8b196 ("selftests/bpf: ensure proper root namespace cleanup when test fail")

Fixes tag

  Fixes: 284ed00a59dd ("selftests/bpf: migrate flow_dissector namespace exclusivity test")

has these problem(s):

  - Target SHA1 does not exist

Maybe you meant

Fixes: 6fb5be12d1bb ("selftests/bpf: migrate flow_dissector namespace exclusivity test")

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: Fixes tag needs some work in the bpf-next tree

[Alexei Starovoitov]

On Sun, Dec 8, 2024 at 11:16 PM Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> In commit
>
>   c721d8f8b196 ("selftests/bpf: ensure proper root namespace cleanup when test fail")
>
> Fixes tag
>
>   Fixes: 284ed00a59dd ("selftests/bpf: migrate flow_dissector namespace exclusivity test")
>
> has these problem(s):
>
>   - Target SHA1 does not exist
>
> Maybe you meant
>
> Fixes: 6fb5be12d1bb ("selftests/bpf: migrate flow_dissector namespace exclusivity test")

I believe the fixes tag was correct when it was first applied
during merge window (without being in for-next),
but then bpf-next/master was rebased after rc1 was released
and fixes tag became wrong.
Now the commit c721d8f8b196 is so far down that we cannot fix it and
force push it. We don't rebase after rc1 either.
Sadly it would have to stay this way.
We probably need to run our pw-check [0] script during the rebase
to make sure such mistakes don't happen.

[0]
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/dborkman/pw.git/tree/pw-check