Re: [patch 2/2] Documentation/process: Add tip tree handbook

From: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>,
	Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>,
	Paul McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	John Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org>,
	acme@redhat.com, frederic@kernel.org,
	Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
	Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>,
	Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>,
	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
	Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [patch 2/2] Documentation/process: Add tip tree handbook
Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2018 13:04:49 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20181108210449.GB22691@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20181108201425.GF1080@thunk.org>

On Thu, Nov 08, 2018 at 03:14:25PM -0500, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 08, 2018 at 09:19:33AM -0800, Dan Williams wrote:
> > 
> > I know at least StGit mail does not grok that "#"notation. I've
> > stopped using it in favor of a "Fixes:" tag. I would think "Fixes:" is
> > preferred over "# <KVER>" if only because it can be used to track
> > fixes to commits that have been backported to stable. Is there any
> > reason for "# <KVER>" to continue in a world where we have "Fixes:"?
> 
> The main annoyance I have with Fixes is because it can be a pain to
> figure out what the "# <KVER>" would be.  Something like:
> 
> % tag --contains DEADBEEF | grep ^v | head
> 
> doesn't work because kernel version numbers don't sort obviously.  So
> v4.10 comes before v4.3 using a normal sort, and even sort -n doesn't
> do the right.
> 
> I suppose it wouldn't be that hard to write a perl/python script that
> correctly sorts kernel version numbers, but when the "# <KVER>" is
> present, I find it convenient.

'sort -V' should help you out here, no need to write anything new :)

> (Also note that even with fast SSD's and/or everything in page cache,
> runnning "tag --contains <COMMITID>" will take a good 3-4 seconds, and
> if the git packs are not in the page cache, and/or you're unfortunate
> enough to have your git trees on an HDD.... it's not pretty.)

I recommend the "static cache" or whatever that thing is called, that
helps out a _LOT_ with stuff like this.  For the kernel tree, which is
never rebased, it speeds up this so much.

thanks,

greg k-h