Hi all,
In commit
d4fc3640ff36 ("block, bfq: set next_rq to waker_bfqq->next_rq in waker injection")
Fixes tag
Fixes: c5089591c3ba ("block, bfq: detect wakers and unconditionally inject their I/O")
has these problem(s):
- Target SHA1 does not exist
Maybe you meant
Fixes: 13a857a4c4e8 ("block, bfq: detect wakers and unconditionally inject their I/O")
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
On 1/26/21 9:01 AM, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Tue 26-01-21 08:47:55, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> On 1/26/21 6:29 AM, Jan Kara wrote:
>>> On Mon 25-01-21 11:39:50, Jens Axboe wrote:
>>>> On 1/25/21 11:35 AM, Paolo Valente wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Il giorno 25 gen 2021, alle ore 10:40, Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]> ha scritto:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In commit
>>>>>>
>>>>>> d4fc3640ff36 ("block, bfq: set next_rq to waker_bfqq->next_rq in waker injection")
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Fixes tag
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Fixes: c5089591c3ba ("block, bfq: detect wakers and unconditionally inject their I/O")
>>>>>>
>>>>>> has these problem(s):
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - Target SHA1 does not exist
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Maybe you meant
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Fixes: 13a857a4c4e8 ("block, bfq: detect wakers and unconditionally inject their I/O")
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Jens,
>>>>> how to proceed in such a case (with patches already applied by you)?
>>>>> Shall I send you a v2 with only this change?
>>>>
>>>> We just have to ignore it... But in the future, always double check that
>>>> you are using the right shas, not some sha from an internal tree.
>>>
>>> FWIW I have a commit hook in my git tree that just refuses a commit with
>>> unknown Fixes tag SHA. Exactly to catch such mishaps in the patches I
>>> merge...
>>
>> That's not a bad idea, would help catch it upfront. Can you share the
>> hook?
>
> Sure, attached. Note that the hook just gets commit ID from the Fixes tag
> and formats it with 12 commit ID digits and appropriate commit subject.
Thanks, that looks great, and also fixes up short shas.
--
Jens Axboe