MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <mhng-0da58f05-1d17-4081-8610-787287c5de61@palmer-si-x1c4>
References: <mhng-0da58f05-1d17-4081-8610-787287c5de61@palmer-si-x1c4>
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2017 19:47:16 -0500
Message-ID: <CA+55aFxsmN4YhRUVe9Ehu36xKSJm0V3LFO7dT1Yk+bfHXa6wYA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] RISC-V Cleanups and ABI Fixes for 4.15-rc2
To: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@sifive.com>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        patches@groups.riscv.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1159
Lines: 25

On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 4:39 PM, Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@sifive.com> wrote:
>
> I've been maintaining the various cleanup patch sets I have as their own
> branches, which I then merged together and signed.  Each merge commit
> has a short summary of the changes, and each branch is based on your
> latest tag (4.15-rc1, in this case).  If this isn't the right way to do
> this then feel free to suggest something else, but it seems sane to me.

The individual branches with merges look fine.

What I don't really like is how very recent they are. Many of the
commits were done today, and thus clearly were never through the 0-day
robot etc.

I don't actually think the 0day robot does RISC-V at all, at least not
yet, so in this case it probably doesn't really matter, but in general
I _hate_ seeing pull requests that come in on a Friday afternoon where
a lot of the  commits clearly happened that same day. It's simply a
sign of things likely having been rushed, which in turn often leads to
issues down the line.

So the structure of the history looks ok, but I hope that "very
recently made" is a one-time thing rather than a pattern. Ok?

           Linus