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=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,UNPARSEABLE_RELAY 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 68B2BC433E1 for ; Wed, 27 May 2020 18:49:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C2FF2089D for ; Wed, 27 May 2020 18:49:03 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=oracle.com header.i=@oracle.com header.b="pyht2KcX" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726450AbgE0StC (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 May 2020 14:49:02 -0400 Received: from userp2130.oracle.com ([156.151.31.86]:43980 "EHLO userp2130.oracle.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726467AbgE0StB (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 May 2020 14:49:01 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (userp2130.oracle.com [127.0.0.1]) by userp2130.oracle.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 04RIfcfA088898 for ; Wed, 27 May 2020 18:49:01 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=oracle.com; h=date : from : to : subject : message-id : mime-version : content-type; s=corp-2020-01-29; bh=aYyzXBc2wBIjnBV8MDNV2HVVEWN2eh/drmCoDK323hw=; b=pyht2KcX+6dVn+WYKn/Pnh4o/Obtgk6JtGaJTxettpa6Y53DeZUJdFLIl12cJd5Uxs9E iTSL/guA32wtgqEEoB/KXXPX1SDLVfFJBjYGWXBn4Jo+P7bb0LAFIL8NMEIqD2h1R2Gw RCmKSSX+uXF69oxKufDkU33YutceqJ83C+l7MZDEvKnK5J4ij/ZasT9puo6rPGDP0bIH QGcC/j1XA4xaWk89nunW5SmieQfaA1irgnkJ+H00Jq5Uc0tTOSozjzpk62sRVc9EhxFj fU7uX7YyEDjwYZy9NAECc/4WkL0CURoU/ItBA0f6bE2iF/Hv2T3wRBHiMcSVNOilstq/ ZA== Received: from aserp3030.oracle.com (aserp3030.oracle.com [141.146.126.71]) by userp2130.oracle.com with ESMTP id 316u8r15q5-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL) for ; Wed, 27 May 2020 18:49:00 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (aserp3030.oracle.com [127.0.0.1]) by aserp3030.oracle.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 04RIh3iA164417 for ; Wed, 27 May 2020 18:49:00 GMT Received: from aserv0121.oracle.com (aserv0121.oracle.com [141.146.126.235]) by aserp3030.oracle.com with ESMTP id 317ddra6n6-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Wed, 27 May 2020 18:49:00 +0000 Received: from abhmp0004.oracle.com (abhmp0004.oracle.com [141.146.116.10]) by aserv0121.oracle.com (8.14.4/8.13.8) with ESMTP id 04RImxKZ018082 for ; Wed, 27 May 2020 18:48:59 GMT Received: from localhost (/67.169.218.210) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Wed, 27 May 2020 11:48:59 -0700 Date: Wed, 27 May 2020 11:48:58 -0700 From: "Darrick J. Wong" To: xfs Subject: [XFS SUMMIT] Ugh, Rebasing Sucks! Message-ID: <20200527184858.GM8230@magnolia> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=6000 definitions=9633 signatures=668686 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 mlxlogscore=999 bulkscore=0 mlxscore=0 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 suspectscore=1 spamscore=0 malwarescore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2004280000 definitions=main-2005270143 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=6000 definitions=9633 signatures=668686 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 malwarescore=0 mlxscore=0 priorityscore=1501 spamscore=0 cotscore=-2147483648 suspectscore=1 phishscore=0 clxscore=1015 mlxlogscore=999 bulkscore=0 adultscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 impostorscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2004280000 definitions=main-2005270143 Sender: linux-xfs-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org Hi everyone, Many of you have complained (both publicly and privately) about the heavy cost of rebasing your development trees, particularly when you're getting close to sending a series out for review. I get it, there have been a lot of large refactoring patchsets coming in the past few kernel cycles, and this has caused a lot of treewide churn. I don't mind cleanups of things that have been weird and wonky about XFS for years, but, frankly, rebasing is soul-grinding. To that end, I propose reducing the frequency of (my own) for-next pushes to reduce how often people feel compelled to rebase when they're trying to get a series ready for review. Specifically, I would like to make an informal for-next push schedule as follows: 1 Between -rc1 and -rc4, I'll collect critical bug fixes for the merge window that just closed. These should be small changes, so I'll put them out incrementally with the goal of landing everything in -rc4, and they shouldn't cause major disruptions for anyone else working on a big patchset. This is more or less what I've been doing up till now -- if it's been on the list for > 24h and someone's reviewed it, I'll put it in for-next for wider testing. 2 A day or two after -rc4 drops. This push is targeted for the next merge window. Coming three weeks after -rc1, I hope this will give everyone enough time for a round of rebase, review, and debugging of large changesets after -rc1. IOWs, the majority of patchsets should be ready to go in before we get halfway to the next merge window. 3 Another push a day or two after -rc6 drops. This will hopefully give everyone a second chance to land patchsets that were nearly ready but didn't quite make it for -rc4; or other cleanups that would have interfered with the first round. Once this is out, we're more or less finished with the big patchsets. 4 Perhaps another big push a day or two after -rc8 drops? I'm not keen on doing this. It's not often that the kernel goes beyond -rc6 and I find it really stressful when the -rc's drag on but people keep sending large new patchsets. Talk about stumbling around in the dark... 5 Obviously, I wouldn't hold back on critical bug fixes to things that are broken in for-next, since the goal is to promote testing, not hinder it. Hopefully this will cut down on the "arrrgh I was almost ready to send this but then for-next jumped and nggghghghg" feelings. :/ Thoughts? Flames? --D