From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1959DC43461 for ; Fri, 16 Apr 2021 15:02:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFE1E61184 for ; Fri, 16 Apr 2021 15:02:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S245595AbhDPPCu (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 Apr 2021 11:02:50 -0400 Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.158.5]:44708 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S245542AbhDPPCh (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 Apr 2021 11:02:37 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098419.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.43/8.16.0.43) with SMTP id 13GEXhNB172127; Fri, 16 Apr 2021 11:02:07 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h=subject : to : cc : references : from : message-id : date : in-reply-to : content-type : content-transfer-encoding : mime-version; s=pp1; bh=w/yMQKuVW9fDcWIKDNdoXX1DtC9RCc8+7zazJq8dg+w=; b=MY3fU53zminB1r0bRcZlHcp2yfq4FUAV6Hfji8QgWDY/2bm7q/+FbYuFVyBSqyk9Hmhk +uIBHQG8VgecOFzAkCA0RHKhDW3eCrF9NEyDisEtG3xLZ1TBmp95Y0L8NC30KfxuNLZ4 /E2gUQmao0fISuP3J0/McVXR6x/n6fRmLW+vgln6N1SONdeHAm5HU+0nQGQInj5KqGJz j/kXTib9U0nNEcyaeTpgtH1ephba2yS+7bwA9tgQPv03opxsA83shiZ5gPKuh5KbYpPU gg6wlGaA9cVdRjS87pw40QPvSZBEO1RzTLpIZUZcks5tzTNgfR7k17LZcR36Mb9WpzRw Fw== Received: from pps.reinject (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 37xxnpnum1-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 16 Apr 2021 11:02:07 -0400 Received: from m0098419.ppops.net (m0098419.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by pps.reinject (8.16.0.43/8.16.0.43) with SMTP id 13GEYxR4177223; Fri, 16 Apr 2021 11:02:06 -0400 Received: from ppma04ams.nl.ibm.com (63.31.33a9.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [169.51.49.99]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 37xxnpnuk5-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 16 Apr 2021 11:02:06 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma04ams.nl.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma04ams.nl.ibm.com (8.16.0.43/8.16.0.43) with SMTP id 13GEwkLL005019; Fri, 16 Apr 2021 15:02:04 GMT Received: from b06cxnps4076.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06relay13.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.109.198]) by ppma04ams.nl.ibm.com with ESMTP id 37u3n8vha0-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 16 Apr 2021 15:02:04 +0000 Received: from d06av25.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av25.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.61]) by b06cxnps4076.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 13GF227c40305106 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 16 Apr 2021 15:02:02 GMT Received: from d06av25.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3010311C050; Fri, 16 Apr 2021 15:02:02 +0000 (GMT) Received: from d06av25.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id D5E3811C04C; Fri, 16 Apr 2021 15:02:01 +0000 (GMT) Received: from oc7455500831.ibm.com (unknown [9.171.64.24]) by d06av25.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Fri, 16 Apr 2021 15:02:01 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Re: linux-next: Fixes tag needs some work in the kvm tree To: Stephen Rothwell , Paolo Bonzini Cc: KVM , Claudio Imbrenda , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linux Next Mailing List References: <20210416222731.3e82b3a0@canb.auug.org.au> <00222197-fb22-ab0a-97e2-11c9f85a67f1@de.ibm.com> <2b825142-fdd9-be35-6d88-bb3b9c985122@redhat.com> <20210417005831.3785688b@canb.auug.org.au> From: Christian Borntraeger Message-ID: Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2021 17:02:01 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.9.0 In-Reply-To: <20210417005831.3785688b@canb.auug.org.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-GUID: Q6DfPmDgTMAAqyTRix6m6_ArjyHkJHDb X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: mOzbzfkBCG9X2lN1LUhO8of4u-bZWqiY Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Proofpoint-UnRewURL: 0 URL was un-rewritten MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.391,18.0.761 definitions=2021-04-16_07:2021-04-16,2021-04-16 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 spamscore=0 malwarescore=0 clxscore=1015 adultscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 bulkscore=0 priorityscore=1501 mlxlogscore=999 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2104060000 definitions=main-2104160110 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: kvm@vger.kernel.org On 16.04.21 16:58, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > > On Fri, 16 Apr 2021 16:02:01 +0200 Paolo Bonzini wrote: >> >> On 16/04/21 14:38, Christian Borntraeger wrote: >>> On 16.04.21 14:27, Stephen Rothwell wrote: >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> In commit >>>> >>>>    c3171e94cc1c ("KVM: s390: VSIE: fix MVPG handling for prefixing and >> MSO") >>>> >>>> Fixes tag >>>> >>>>    Fixes: bdf7509bbefa ("s390/kvm: VSIE: correctly handle MVPG when in >> VSIE") >>>> >>>> has these problem(s): >>>> >>>>    - Subject does not match target commit subject >>>>      Just use >>>>     git log -1 --format='Fixes: %h ("%s")' >>> >>> Hmm, this has been sitting in kvms390/next for some time now. Is this a > new check? >>> >> >> Maybe you just missed it when it was reported for kvms390? >> >> https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-next/msg59652.html > > It was a different commit SHA then and was reported because the Fixes > SHA did not exist. It was fixed the next day, so I guess either I > missed reporting this different problem, or I thought at least it had > been fixed to use the correct SHA. I am not completely consistent, > sometimes :-) Yeah, seems that my fix was only half-way correct then but it managed to get past your review.