On Wed, Jul 30, 2025 at 11:11:43AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Fri, 25 Jul 2025 at 19:46, Neeraj Upadhyay > <neeraj.upadh...@kernel.org> wrote: > > > > This pull request contains the following branches: > > > > rcu-exp.23.07.2025 [..] > > I've pulled this, but I do have a request (or two, really).. > > The octopus merges look cool, but they have the problem that if there > are subtle bugs introduced by interactions between branches, they are > a pain to bisect. So in general, I advise people to avoid them. > > But the *real* thing I note is that merges are more subtle than normal > commits in the first place, and octopus merges are subtler still - and > your have no explanation at all outside of the 'merge X Y and Z into > ABC'. > > Please write more of a commit message explaining what those branches > *are* that you are merging. > > Which is the second part of the request: when you ask me to merge "the > following branches", the branch names are basically line noise. I'm > not in the least interested in seeing what the date of a branch is. > That adds no value. > > So can you please instead describe the branches by what they do than > by some internal branch name you used. I made up my own "names" for > the sub-branches in the merge message, but it would be much nicer if > you did it in the pull request. > > So, for example, I changed "rcu-exp.23.07.2025" to be "Expedited grace > period", which seems to be what that branch name was cryptically > trying to say.
Apologies! I missed the empty merge-commit commit log when reviewing this pull request, and I should have spotted that. :-( As it happens, I will be sending the pull request for the v6.18 merge window, so I will stop doing my usual octopus merges (hey, they *were* cool!) and instead merge each branch separately, with each merge's commit log giving a synopsis of the commits in the branch being merged. If you have a best-practice series of merges example in mind, could you please point me at it? Thanx, Paul