From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [198.175.65.11]) (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 3C818188713; Mon, 8 Sep 2025 09:11:07 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.11 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1757322668; cv=none; b=IIZkbFH/GJhqbWJwvrUVUQADfcz0YbjVma42LI3A6t6mWAuFr48TCiUkbjINKpIT6/j2mb+NfGrvv4xOlonX6yib6SXA+DW5mjWexnqmLH+xLzbGNExG/umaE/Bpcv3WVnG6X3BSxf8hf50/CBACLaxVXDfL7OcsrnOieHolDxk= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1757322668; c=relaxed/simple; bh=cswmx7ptxpYIBCZQu6oWFXqzBcIcfFh6RwYlTTHdkRg=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=HuqryV9XxXVO0FEG+3k/i/2z+3fbTXphIsOE0WxjCce91E1dCRcArBOeNckL1lYutJkw80+3TWz6wA2mAS6BK5pxDXctQG6QNjsC7KnxjPsZx0jx2QdRetOD8vIgBMBBqB2qeX2hC3O1PikfBugA33L/z2nm69tuFou7Q380CTE= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=g/d2qHvh; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.11 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="g/d2qHvh" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1757322668; x=1788858668; h=from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:date: message-id:mime-version; bh=cswmx7ptxpYIBCZQu6oWFXqzBcIcfFh6RwYlTTHdkRg=; b=g/d2qHvhEKJfI9vmJHdpbfvMUQcCGlYn2KhFZwch9DgbuW/Mz1rinawy n1M7uzbAC90DiaiZtqIJdqIkeO4b7MYfjtkskyEZF/BjcABnryhoGi5NY XPD3M5+8iEBC3UyQyUlobw2ITIFVplQTrx3EfuQUwXo471w8tR1E9iulr xyRE7L5eAXBpq6ydt3clQUKeOavvtR0ZsIWz/86yqJDlRAZAhA087z8S/ c4Yz3Fac9hZ/DGCZEMFI7FmEUodVEan7EXjyaGvFIA9bhJ8uHRL6eLv79 dVXgnxrVRyK7LTJbvNXDqwpSwex+xj4sc+fsojnA5Ir24Cxd8sPt2NKNu A==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: z0N8NgpQR+udhR41pyENTw== X-CSE-MsgGUID: 8X9DsWOaTM+pO7QBOXltxg== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6800,10657,11546"; a="69828564" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.18,248,1751266800"; d="scan'208";a="69828564" Received: from fmviesa004.fm.intel.com ([10.60.135.144]) by orvoesa103.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 08 Sep 2025 02:11:08 -0700 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: QZO9IXB9RWa+Fpw1hzTQdA== X-CSE-MsgGUID: Pnp32DZySveLb1Wf6lspcQ== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.18,248,1751266800"; d="scan'208";a="177946272" Received: from carterle-desk.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO localhost) ([10.245.246.204]) by fmviesa004-auth.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 08 Sep 2025 02:11:04 -0700 From: Jani Nikula To: Linus Torvalds , Konstantin Ryabitsev Cc: Greg KH , Jens Axboe , Caleb Sander Mateos , io-uring , workflows@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Link trailers revisited (was Re: [GIT PULL] io_uring fix for 6.17-rc5) In-Reply-To: Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo References: <9ef87524-d15c-4b2c-9f86-00417dad9c48@kernel.dk> <20250905-lovely-prehistoric-goldfish-04e1c3@lemur> <20250905-sparkling-stalwart-galago-8a87e0@lemur> <2025090614-busily-upright-444d@gregkh> <20250906-almond-tench-of-aurora-3431ee@lemur> <20250906-macho-reindeer-of-certainty-ff2cbb@lemur> Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2025 12:11:01 +0300 Message-ID: <882495028cfb73b2db0119a8c37e34a85344ce2e@intel.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: workflows@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain On Sat, 06 Sep 2025, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Sat, 6 Sept 2025 at 11:50, Konstantin Ryabitsev > wrote: >> >> The primary consumer of this are the CI systems, though, like those that plug >> into patchwork > > Yes, for a CI, it makes sense to try to have a fixed base, if such a > base exists. > > But for that case, when a base exists and is published, why aren't > those people and tools *actually* using git then? That gets rid of all > the strangeness - and inefficiency - of trying to recreate it from > emails. > > So I'd rather encourage people to have git branches that they expose, > if CI is the main use case. For i915 and xe, we'll want *all* patches go through CI. I'm sure there are other drivers like that. CI is not the "main" use case, just one use case. I'd like to have patches on the list for review and discussion, and git branches for CI and everything else. Insert "Both? Both. Both. Both Is Good." meme here. To me it sounds like it would be useful to have tooling (b4? git send-email?) that could push a git branch *and* send those changes as a patch series, with a well-formed, machine-readable part in the cover letter that points at the git repo. I guess you could have server git hooks or forge workflows to send the patches as well. (Though you still can't review what's on the list, and blindly apply what's in the git repo.) BR, Jani. -- Jani Nikula, Intel