From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from perceval.ideasonboard.com (perceval.ideasonboard.com [213.167.242.64]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6753954652 for ; Thu, 11 Sep 2025 19:29:42 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=213.167.242.64 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1757618985; cv=none; b=Nhl2O9/3hEwXD4XUUBMuCf6Rcru02iA2k13llyx+mJpQauq5klR2dIU9M63lvtoFjNgMFpvPrNifL7n7iAoza34yG+TW0d5xUh1pzXgt3RlR1LwJa9CypjDYjyk5kPjVMzS5KbWPe3VyYwRIsfAQV5hwrTEKAkOsv0eisaCFvok= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1757618985; c=relaxed/simple; bh=xH3L+rJDeHoo+3xCa6E7H8LcQh2CpUhxXwHIUZf3qDs=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=qHVRS2wFJRyTyFE2BW9Sdn3PFVepLSTQpF075MEH3ayKeNqJfQvgBjT3IE1ecUh51D/pZblgByD5qLZo/OYJJDWYW3/jq1mLWFLmQb7px/0UvNt376blCkBMOJxNo9473mBuq8c8st616L6tUXfZQW2+dwmvBaE/L9ZwVDKJdLc= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=ideasonboard.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ideasonboard.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ideasonboard.com header.i=@ideasonboard.com header.b=hvpoGfpS; arc=none smtp.client-ip=213.167.242.64 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=ideasonboard.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ideasonboard.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ideasonboard.com header.i=@ideasonboard.com header.b="hvpoGfpS" Received: from pendragon.ideasonboard.com (81-175-209-231.bb.dnainternet.fi [81.175.209.231]) by perceval.ideasonboard.com (Postfix) with UTF8SMTPSA id CF5FC596; Thu, 11 Sep 2025 21:28:24 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=ideasonboard.com; s=mail; t=1757618905; bh=xH3L+rJDeHoo+3xCa6E7H8LcQh2CpUhxXwHIUZf3qDs=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=hvpoGfpS2QV+5yAu7Kf9gxOXbLZBAoLMlvJyN0syQYa1E3tAc1iFdhTk/HTggjByu 7PcFeusGDtNCFi0p4lFOPP4vW1QmbxO8pvcDmi+JtzgwQAS5hmFeP2watfei5m4jzQ QipfABIMWGaCgT+JAKrB7r4yBBAAtTo19FPZkSkw= Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2025 22:29:14 +0300 From: Laurent Pinchart To: Steven Rostedt Cc: Mark Brown , Krzysztof Kozlowski , ksummit@lists.linux.dev Subject: Re: [MAINTAINERS SUMMIT] Hidden commits from next (aka why maintainers hoard them in backpack) Message-ID: <20250911192914.GG13915@pendragon.ideasonboard.com> References: <299e6601-a83e-4e5d-9dd9-12ae796cd913@kernel.org> <20250911122711.GC8177@pendragon.ideasonboard.com> <20250911102506.43ee7f9c@gandalf.local.home> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: ksummit@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20250911102506.43ee7f9c@gandalf.local.home> Hi Steve, On Thu, Sep 11, 2025 at 10:25:06AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Thu, 11 Sep 2025 14:40:45 +0100 Mark Brown wrote: > > > > I've heard a maintainer saying that Linus doesn't like subsystem trees > > > to have lots of merges. Any help debunking that would be appreciated. > > > > AIUI it's a quality of merges issue rather than a number of merges > > issue, if the merge commits all have commit messages that convey useful > > information about something that makes sense then you should be fine. > > If the merge commits are all just default messages not so much. Things > > like taking a pull request with a descriptive commit like the cover > > letter for the merge hopefully do have some purpose and a useful commit > > message. > > > > The quantity thing comes up because a common way you end up with a lot > > of merges is automation which tends to also imply lacking changelogs and > > motivation. > > Basically a merge commit should be no different than any other commit. It > should have a purpose and that purpose should be described in the merge's > change log just like every other commit has its purpose described in their > own. > > I now have several topic branches, and I try hard to avoid merges as they > tend to make my pull requests more complex. But every so often, I have a > patch that comes in that is required for work in two of my existing topic > branches. This is a case where one change is required for two topic > branches to continue more work. Do you then send an individual pull request for each topic branch to Linus ? What if one of those topic branches had to aggregate patches from, let's say, 10 different series from 10 contributors who each sent you a pull request ? Would you merge them or cherry-pick them ? > In these rare events, I will apply the change to one of the topic branches, > then merge it into the other with a detailed explanation to why I needed to > do that merge. > > Linus hasn't complained about it, so I'm guessing that's the correct thing > to do. -- Regards, Laurent Pinchart