D'oh! I forgot to add the In-Reply-To tag. I meant to reply to <https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/T/#mf183db5f382b4a39cf52a4a1d2ca8f96697c312e>
On 2026-02-25T01:56:08+0100, Alejandro Colomar wrote: > Hi Steven, Greg, > > [I'll reply to several sub-threads at once.] > > > [Message-ID: <[email protected]>] > On Mon, Jan 13, 2025 at 09:51:01AM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > Geert Uytterhoeven <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > $ git help fixes > > > 'fixes' is aliased to 'show --format='Fixes: %h ("%s")' -s' > > > > Hmm, I've just been manually adding the Fixes tags ;-) That's because when > > I add a fixes tag, I also do a more in depth analysis to make sure the > > commit being tagged is really the cause of the problem. A lot of my fixes > > tags are due to very subtle bugs, and a lot of times its a combination of > > event that happened. > > I also precede the generation of the fixes tag with an in-depth > analysis. However, that doesn't conflict with using a git alias to > generate it, once I've reached a conclusion. I use this alias to > generate them, and it's quite handy: > <https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/docs/man-pages/man-pages.git/tree/CONTRIBUTING.d/git#n46> > > > > > That said, maybe one day I'll use a script or alias in the future. > > > [Message-ID: <[email protected]>] > On Sat, Jan 11, 2025 at 6:08 PM Steven Rostedt <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Fri, 10 Jan 2025 16:21:35 -0800 > > Jacob Keller <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > I personally find the date helpful as it can help place a commit without > > > needing to take the extra time to do a lookup. > > > > I've never found dates to be meaningful. I'm always more concerned about > > when a commit was added to mainline. Thus the version where the commit was > > added is very important for me. > > Indeed. I agree with this, and it's a quite important difference. > The commit dates are strictly increasing, which means you can use the > date to perform a search of a commit, if there's a collision in the > hash (and possibly in the subject). > > I documented this in the man-pages project, where I require the commit > date to appear in Fixes tags. > <https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/docs/man-pages/man-pages.git/tree/CONTRIBUTING.d/patches/trailer#n16> > > > This is why I keep a bare clone of Linus's > > tree and commonly do: > > > > $ git describe --contains fd3040b9394c > > v5.19-rc1~159^2~154^2 > > $ git describe --contains a76053707dbf > > v5.15-rc1~157^2~376^2~4 > > > > I can easily see that a76053707dbf was added in 5.15 and fd3040b9394c was > > added in 5.19. The amount of work needed to add dates to Fixes tags would > > greatly exceed the amount of added work someone would need to do to do the > > above operations if they wanted to know the order of commits. > > > [Message-ID: <2025011032-gargle-showing-7500@gregkh>] > Greg wrote (Fri, 10 Jan 2025 13:32:22 +0100): > > Please no, you will break all of our tooling and scripts that parse > > these types of fields. The git commit id and commit header is all we > > need to properly determine this type of information, no need to add a > > date in here at all. > > > [...] > > > > So I don't think you need to add a date here. Dates also really do not > > mean much with commits, what matters is what release a commit is in, not > > when it was originally made. We have commits that take years to show up > > in a release, so if you only look at a date, you will be mistaken many > > times as it's not showing what came before what many times (i.e. we > > apply commits out-of-date-order all the time.) > > As I said above, I agree that the commit date is the right choice. > Author dates can be out-of-date-order by years. Commit dates are > necessarily in order, though. > > > [Message-ID: <[email protected]>] > Steven wrote (Fri, 10 Jan 2025 08:03:31 -0500): > > How can it lead to misjudgment? If you have two or more hashes matching, do > > you really think they'll have the same subjects? > > The possibility isn't zero. Statistically, it's quite low. However, > it's non-zero. > > $ git log --format=tformat:'%s' | sort | uniq -c | sort | tail > 248 Merge branch 'perf-urgent-for-linus' of > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip > 263 Merge git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/davem/net-2.6 > 275 Merge branch 'x86-urgent-for-linus' of > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip > 293 Merge tag 'arm64-fixes' of > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/arm64/linux > 314 Merge branch 'akpm' (patches from Andrew) > 315 Merge git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/netdev/net > 318 Merge tag 'scsi-fixes' of > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jejb/scsi > 324 Merge branch 'for-linus' of > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/dtor/input > 369 Merge tag 'for-linus' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/virt/kvm/kvm > 670 Merge git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/davem/net > $ git log --format=tformat:'%s' | grep -v ^Merge | sort | uniq -c | sort | > tail > grep: (standard input): binary file matches > 22 drm/amd/display: Clean up some inconsistent indenting > 25 Auto-update from upstream > 26 [ARM] Update mach-types > 26 pmdomain: Merge branch fixes into next > 30 s390: update defconfigs > 32 tools arch x86: Sync the msr-index.h copy with the kernel sources > 38 [SPARC64]: Update defconfig. > 52 mmc: Merge branch fixes into next > 59 drm/i915: Convert wait_for(I915_READ(reg)) to > intel_wait_for_register() > 62 batman-adv: Start new development cycle > > Subjects repeat every now and then, and the entropy in some subjects is > actually quite low. > > If you include the commit date in a Fixes tag, then you preclude the > entire possibility of a commit reference clash, because you won't have > two patches committed in the same date with the same subject and same > hash (unless you *really* try) > > > [Message-ID: <2025011115-energize-edge-c9c7@gregkh>] > Greg wrote (Sat, 11 Jan 2025 06:48:53 +0100): > > And if it isn't long enough, tools like: > > https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected] > > can help figure it out as well. > > That uses hash+subject. This may be not enough in some cases (see how > much subjects repeat, in the logs above). And importantly, a fixes tag > may become ambiguous *after* it has been written, so you can't predict > much. > > By having a commit date in the Fixes tag, you could even simplify the > script to just do a binary search in case of ambiguity. Let's say I > want to find the following commit (arbitrarily taken from the first > Fixes tag I've found in my copy of linux.git): > > a2e459555c5f (2023-08-09; "shmem: stable directory offsets") > > We could find it, with a trivial command line. We only even need two > characters of the hash: > > $ git log --oneline --after='2023-08-08' --before='2023-08-10' \ > | grep ^a2; > a2e459555c5f shmem: stable directory offsets > > No need for a huge script to disambiguate. This is even typo-resistant, > as one could eventually find something that is similar enough, if one > had such a field with a typo (in any of the three fields). You'd be > able to search by the other two fields, and two fields should be > _usually_ enough for disambiguating, and the third one could corroborate > the typo. > > So, what would you think of having the commit date in commit references > such as Fixes tags? > > > Have a lovely night! > Alex > > -- > <https://www.alejandro-colomar.es> -- <https://www.alejandro-colomar.es>
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
