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 CB599322DB5 for ; Thu, 11 Sep 2025 12:49:35 +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=1757594975; cv=none; b=kXxjD+sba7DMfoDsbB+aaeMiCw64ZV/NidTH+5/aPKajDvPEz+MHNnWAW9ZNqzeZhhUDhkBHzMNgUsv78+ofYf2E4iJBEPy9bTPs7yC2t6X18rhc2w2poBgM6HljkrG5OukFJVQwmQLjTtZHQg+aph7GjgdFPkq4lnErG6PoIlM= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1757594975; c=relaxed/simple; bh=zli78H3u7buqMBfr/1z5LbkO/bPmiCFh93VTKNJygac=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=pSI78BJeAH0HwwopufKs+8i18NdCzTSS2jqjkrztP/hDX2+TwUU0dqwDdQ5zupO+vAoPRencosnX0Yi3QbYGiGb7a4IXdrqvwoe3pl5qmGxFIBTEPHpA3F8teA2wm71R2nqgms24wOJez6YMmzo9iC6GDBl7b2gJvXDkskK3SZg= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=Fkgut9LS; 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="Fkgut9LS" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7735CC4CEF1; Thu, 11 Sep 2025 12:49:35 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1757594975; bh=zli78H3u7buqMBfr/1z5LbkO/bPmiCFh93VTKNJygac=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=Fkgut9LSTCb2TtVH43vGL+xqOKzEJHaXYrUIdK9Wyc6irB1JS1uMx+pXlTGFBF58J HN3rkZdkSND6tt/Irvj7QTLC5GnwZ8JpTLGlgDUBcQo6uzXsbFhnb91ZHcwgxstQSL fvg/nD5hKkSZdTN2l0Mhqet8dppiidxa3jaTV6MNAxeDGrhVdPa0mTHuPI5Y7yR3Os Yb69+rGlA4oWFNsdChIPYf4abupgO08NL9IxpjrmGwS54du8fEES5jURqc1C8JOptc +22whDzLfljkqywspC+PvMTuuK+6vUUUfjzJlgeHtrQ1Bosc5WgvG1soPbQFilSMwP cV+BcnkY3JGzA== Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2025 08:49:34 -0400 From: Sasha Levin To: Krzysztof Kozlowski Cc: ksummit@lists.linux.dev Subject: Re: [MAINTAINERS SUMMIT] Hidden commits from next (aka why maintainers hoard them in backpack) Message-ID: 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=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <299e6601-a83e-4e5d-9dd9-12ae796cd913@kernel.org> On Thu, Sep 11, 2025 at 01:04:19PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >Hi, > > >I have noticed at least a few cases where sub-maintainers collect >patches, but their trees are not included linux-next. Or their patches >are not fed to linux-next. > >I don’t see a good reason to keep valid, proper patches - collected by >trusted sub-maintainers and intended for upstream submission - out of >linux-next. If a sub-maintainer is trusted in collecting patches and >sending them to the upstream maintainer, these commits should be visible >in the linux-next. > >I have occasionally asked sub-maintainers to add their trees to the >linux-next, and sometimes this worked. In other cases it could not work >for various reasons, e.g. workflow of the upstream maintainer or >reluctance to share commits early. These reasons are what I would like >to discuss and, hopefully, improve. > > >Why is that a problem? >====================== >Patch was reviewed on the list day X and applied by the sub-maintainer. >Then for two, three or four weeks, this patch is not being in the >linux-next means: >1. Limited or no build bot coverage. > >2. No actual integration testing, even if it is just spotting early >merge conflicts. > >3. No wide community testing. > >4. Contributors cannot base their patchsets on linux-next for >convenience, but need to find each sub-maintainer tree and pull it. For >few cases (see further) these sub-maintainer trees are not documented in >MAINTAINERS, so it is impossible for contributor to rebase on current >maintainer's tree! This topic seems to come up on an annual basis :) As a follow up to last year's discussion[1] I wrote a bot[2] that is able to analyze pull requests and respond with statistics about how long commits spent in -next as well as on the mailing lists. An example of the reports it produces is available here[3]. I haven't ended up receiving signal from Linus that it's useful and not a waste of his time, so I stopped sending these mails out. [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/ZyAUO0b3z_f_kVnj@sashalap/ [2] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/sashal/next-analysis.git/ [3] https://lore.kernel.org/all/Zxf3vp82MfPTWNLx@sashalap/ -- Thanks, Sasha