Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20221114225719.1657174-1-nathan@kernel.org> <CAKwvOdn67r3ZYb5XZkae3i5797GGV3=8=nLC7kT2d4On3OEm5A@mail.gmail.com>
 <Y3aMxfhBw9YsWiKr@dev-arch.thelio-3990X>
In-Reply-To: <Y3aMxfhBw9YsWiKr@dev-arch.thelio-3990X>
From:   Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>
Date:   Thu, 17 Nov 2022 14:51:37 -0800
Message-ID: <CAKwvOdmYO0_m3+uWHe_C=7y1zgePQzc27Kd6Pep7Ja_pgbNPZw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: Drop '-mthumb' from AFLAGS_ISA
To:     Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>,
        Sylvestre Ledru <sylvestre@debian.org>
Cc:     Serge Guelton <sguelton@mozilla.com>,
        Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
        Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        llvm@lists.linux.dev, patches@lists.linux.dev,
        "kernelci.org bot" <bot@kernelci.org>,
        Sylvestre Ledru <sylvestre@mozilla.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Nov 17, 2022 at 11:34 AM Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 17, 2022 at 11:15:09AM -0800, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 2:58 PM Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > Fixes: 1d2e9b67b001 ("ARM: 9265/1: pass -march= only to compiler")
> > > Link: htps://salsa.debian.org/pkg-llvm-team/llvm-toolchain/-/blob/17354b030ac4252ff6c5e9d01f4eba28bd406b2d/debian/patches/930008-arm.diff
> >
> > Would you mind using
> > https://salsa.debian.org/pkg-llvm-team/llvm-toolchain/-/blob/snapshot/debian/patches/930008-arm.diff
> > as the link instead? The link on this commit message is a diff against
> > llvm-14, not ToT which is currently llvm-16; the context is quite
> > different as the logic moved source files completely.  Though it does
> > look like Sylvestre has not yet cut a 16 branch for debian's patches.
>
> I would rather use an actual hash to reduce the risk of the link going
> stale from either a branch rename or file rename/removal. I can use a
> hash from the snapshot branch instead, if that would work for you?

It doesn't matter much to me; I trust your judgement; you pick.
Perhaps that depends if the snapshot branch has stable SHAs or whether
they change over time? Maybe Sylvestre can comment on that.
-- 
Thanks,
~Nick Desaulniers