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 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB18BC0015E for ; Thu, 13 Jul 2023 15:07:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232618AbjGMPHM (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Jul 2023 11:07:12 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:42478 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S232696AbjGMPHK (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Jul 2023 11:07:10 -0400 Received: from dfw.source.kernel.org (dfw.source.kernel.org [139.178.84.217]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9B71A2D41; Thu, 13 Jul 2023 08:06:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.kernel.org (relay.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by dfw.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6BD05617DE; Thu, 13 Jul 2023 15:06:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 320E9C433C8; Thu, 13 Jul 2023 15:06:24 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=linuxfoundation.org; s=korg; t=1689260785; bh=BrCUMVcm59ip3FSmvaFKeun1VvhqNZrzrk4aUt0/9Vk=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=dFBjaugwDoPkC2zgwS6Wm+VJbI5MixQEPfHBTO6gxycFEf2JVAYzAjWhScNrxB+du PCsaChe5OoOPQLr0CFNhILR0+O2SKt3Fu5NnH3QLtCt1amoWfvVXAd7pGJlm8c41RC BepfZTr6lmRiu5WI+24k24vpiHDVk/2TF2MpE3xE= Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2023 17:06:22 +0200 From: Greg KH To: Thorsten Leemhuis Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Sasha Levin , Jonathan Corbet Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v1 0/3] docs: stable-kernel-rules: add delayed backporting option and a few tweaks Message-ID: <2023071341-twitter-apron-e023@gregkh> References: <2023071002-phrasing-tranquil-49d6@gregkh> <2023071221-blade-reactive-0707@gregkh> <2023071215-able-mushy-c889@gregkh> <18238769-39c3-2b40-7725-367aa0e5c50b@leemhuis.info> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <18238769-39c3-2b40-7725-367aa0e5c50b@leemhuis.info> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-doc@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jul 13, 2023 at 10:48:14AM +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > On 12.07.23 21:00, Greg KH wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 12, 2023 at 07:02:34PM +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > >> On 12.07.23 17:16, Greg KH wrote: > > [...] > >>>> .. warning:: > >>>> The branches in the -stable-rc tree are rebased each time a new -rc > >>>> is released, as they are created by taking the latest release and > >>>> applying the patches from the stable-queue on top. > >>> > >>> Yes, that is true, but they are also rebased sometimes in intermediate > >>> places, before a -rc is released, just to give CI systems a chance to > >>> test easier. > > [...] > >> Nevertheless makes me wonder: is that strategy wise in times when some > >> ordinary users and some distributions are building kernels straight from > >> git repos instead of tarballs? I'm one of those, as I distribute > >> stable-rc packages for Fedora here: > >> https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/groups/g/kernel-vanilla/coprs/ > > > > As we keep the patches in quilt, not git, it's the best we can do. The > > -rc releases are never a straight-line if we have to do multiple ones, > > we remove patches in the middle, add them at the end or beginning, and > > sometimes even change existing ones. > > > > All of this is stuff that a linear history tool like git can't really > > model well, so we keep a quilt series of the patches in git for anyone > > that want to generate the tree themselves, and we provide the -rc git > > tree for those that don't want to generate it and can live with the > > constant rebasing. > > /me first didn't want to reply, as this is not really important, but > then reconsidered; again, feel free to just ignore this > > FWIW, I do not consider that rebasing to be problem at all; it are those > rebases "sometimes in intermediate places, before a -rc is released, > just to give CI systems a chance to test easier" make things this > slightly annoying bit harder when you want to distribute stable-rc > releases to users. > > But as I said, I can fully understand why you do those as well. I just > with there was a way to reliably get a -rc release from git as well. > Simply tagging them when you do a -rc release would solve all that. Is > that maybe something that could be easily added to your -rc release scripts? I can add a tag, but it would have to be a tag that can be rebased, and git doesn't like that very well :) > /me looks at https://github.com/gregkh/gregkh-linux/tree/master/stable > but failed to find the -rc release script :-/ Hah, no github, it's at: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/stable-queue.git/tree/scripts/quilt-mail But I don't think tags will help much. I'll let anyone who actually runs a CI that uses this to speak up to see if it would before adding them. Also, as proof this works, I just got a report of someone testing the queues and finding a problem at the moment, before we sent anything out for review. So this is working well today. thanks, greg k-h