Re: [patch for 7.11] btrace: fix PR gdb/19829

[Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>]

On 03/17/2016 10:22 AM, Metzger, Markus T wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Pedro Alves [mailto:palves@redhat.com]
>> Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2016 11:07 AM
>> To: Metzger, Markus T <markus.t.metzger@intel.com>;
>> brobecker@adacore.com
>> Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
>> Subject: Re: [patch for 7.11] btrace: fix PR gdb/19829
>>
>> On 03/17/2016 07:48 AM, Markus Metzger wrote:
>>> This is a backport of
>>
>> It's fine with me to put this in the branch.
> 
> Should I wait for Joel's OK, as well?

Joel usually defers deciding whether a patch is safe for the branch
to the maintainer that originally approved it, and I do think it
is safe.  So I believe you're good to go.  Worse that can happen is
Joel yells at me, and we'll revert.  :-)

>> (I'd have cherry picked the commits as individual commits instead of
>> squashing them.)
> 
> There were no conflicts to resolve - other than ChangeLog, of course.  If it
> makes a difference I can cherry-pick them again and push a 3-commit series.

Probably not worth it.

> 
> 
>>> 2f3ef606b91298855e9ea13ae0e0316c23f06c9b
>>> a038fa3e14a477d4d72a26c2e139fa47d2774be2
>>> 33b4777ca1b7b456af8201b98eda27d1b272cbab
>>
>> (
>> When referring to previous commits, I find it nicer to also include the
>> commit's subject.  The current lkml/git practice when referring to previous
>> commits I believe is to put the subject in parens, though I can't find the
>> reference right now.  Like:
>>
>> 2f3ef606b912 (frame: add skip_tailcall_frames)
>> a038fa3e14a4 (stack: check frame_unwind_caller_id)
>> 33b4777ca1b7 (btrace, frame: fix crash in get_frame_type)
>> )
> 
> Changed this to "git log --oneline"'s output:
> 
> 33b4777 btrace, frame: fix crash in get_frame_type
> a038fa3 stack: check frame_unwind_caller_id
> 2f3ef60 frame: add skip_tailcall_frames

Thanks.

I found the reference I was thinking of:

https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/SubmittingPatches

"If you want to refer to a specific commit, don't just refer to the
SHA-1 ID of the commit. Please also include the oneline summary of
the commit, to make it easier for reviewers to know what it is about.
Example:

	Commit e21d2170f36602ae2708 ("video: remove unnecessary
	platform_set_drvdata()") removed the unnecessary
	platform_set_drvdata(), but left the variable "dev" unused,
	delete it.

You should also be sure to use at least the first twelve characters of the
SHA-1 ID.  The kernel repository holds a *lot* of objects, making
collisions with shorter IDs a real possibility.  Bear in mind that, even if
there is no collision with your six-character ID now, that condition may
change five years from now."

Thanks,
Pedro Alves