From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (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 2A370E552 for ; Thu, 11 Sep 2025 12:06:57 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1757592417; cv=none; b=htYnkS68GKiWKZmbk/dPl3eeLig7jjOvix3kcAFJbXCDQRXraHgpe0U/h7PfDk6889oymuI75OkEcg6h5vYz+LJQvqat/MPMeIZaBOnLJVoZBMyMVQVg5aoFK0ptcscNUfHUuU6+CumLg17C6l4r1afKbfNEfaicxoD7Xtzge9c= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1757592417; c=relaxed/simple; bh=SW5PITxjcO7CAbSYOHcLe3qAhfTI19Ao9OVpaSpISfw=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=keO+8gUbA/+skeRUTodPgA1VtRJKZh0lEg/8XG7VooHzazdhQpdwSq+KaopyalptLF/PXt81txWlLxyP8AIeV+/jGK1sKOZY2+8a2V0E5WeeAeam5OjmwjywJeD0TsOL5YMGDH2S5b8yDjzmBu8uMnFjoELJShoNZJOtPEgqWPg= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=qdnxZzVV; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="qdnxZzVV" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 80823C4CEF0; Thu, 11 Sep 2025 12:06:56 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1757592417; bh=SW5PITxjcO7CAbSYOHcLe3qAhfTI19Ao9OVpaSpISfw=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=qdnxZzVVLgurEUIkBPypdalcu9gjYTSvyQ9XqkSXKGESmGaGjFOXKpoTpLNDX2igg 9oj7mhxlBU9UrPb9shzMRgSbRUnwL82/H0bXfXkxgzUOzy+eZ4hus75uocQXQn/rq6 J5Oi3yGldLmPoewyHRCcmuc6eHJz4l3oQ99cvz2I2AnCW94yLgUCsIByFrGBoBi9jv LrsaC+9J1Bm6O7sc5tk0lxo0XtazXdiDv7YZeJnWAVJVyNWnZbpHf/EE1OAIH5L06L bhhV53vw9XoVrLDsRXJkSgi9osdbNJAxNwRYgZVxii3eymFYnPI2BTCwF5VIM2aTby 29Yj2LtGuJTaQ== Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2025 14:06:54 +0200 (CEST) From: Jiri Kosina To: Krzysztof Kozlowski cc: ksummit@lists.linux.dev Subject: Re: [MAINTAINERS SUMMIT] Hidden commits from next (aka why maintainers hoard them in backpack) In-Reply-To: <299e6601-a83e-4e5d-9dd9-12ae796cd913@kernel.org> Message-ID: <81n4979o-0969-q3o1-6n66-979668n0on47@xreary.bet> References: <299e6601-a83e-4e5d-9dd9-12ae796cd913@kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: ksummit@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII On Thu, 11 Sep 2025, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > Identifying the patches > ======================= > There are two cases here for patches committed by sub-maintainers, but > never fed to next: > 1. The upstream maintainer took them via pull request. Hm, why would that imply that they never make to linux-next though? I always keep multiple topic branches that are queued for upcoming merge window, and it doesn't really matter whether they came in from pull request of whether I have created it myself. And all those branches then merge into for-next, which linux-next is consuming. I don't see how the fact that (part of) topic branch came in via pull request would make any difference ... ? Thanks, -- Jiri Kosina SUSE Labs