From owner-svn-src-stable@freebsd.org Thu Mar 29 02:52:54 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-src-stable@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD529F6A628 for ; Thu, 29 Mar 2018 02:52:54 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lists@eitanadler.com) Received: from mail-yw0-x230.google.com (mail-yw0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c05::230]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5563073B8A for ; Thu, 29 Mar 2018 02:52:54 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lists@eitanadler.com) Received: by mail-yw0-x230.google.com with SMTP id u15so1497953ywg.8 for ; Wed, 28 Mar 2018 19:52:54 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=eitanadler.com; s=0xdeadbeef; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=oak0rHEzfiHuX5bS5my1f9PITMPbTS2KEQfIfCK6+xg=; b=c3Kg6cLI/p0GRpTlCaoB6yfbildVLXvkFd88OCw2k81uEaKXK3oj6lMx+VUacn4rlo IusSgR2x1PqnYdWf8GyLqTe23JOIUambdG1dKmEVNGFmAW4saWZoxC8gRPEBOHGviZgY iJrdRydvADi8jgA0Pu/h7Uy3enrbPb9FQuODU= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=oak0rHEzfiHuX5bS5my1f9PITMPbTS2KEQfIfCK6+xg=; b=g+ewyGqSUt2NaiBHMXUbt97GPXdHmjBUgBzShj1zDPutj2YZEq3H60eGTpqKQHNG1E OfqF9wzW4DQ5Tx65dmVS2XohigqaD/5QqTJCSpyGpusBuIeSnfnM1t4nJrzoFyU3hCzB DfG6i3sODDCXHPDl/DFs/WqxKcoVJOKmkzL45jBxkUg9vOd407x9yb7bDTj2I/xJDXpX m8z/7lruw6YPGq2eGw7tUfMr5GmhsB/KWJauK8LdH3QvHusBHkiJjcQ6cAycxYqZo7E1 G6VOO/rAMuwjpnKT3RZ0IsYC5zCnhQF/7C5EHYL4fqKRPHWGVbvE3FaNTO4PVYatchRS xFkw== X-Gm-Message-State: AElRT7HTbymoqxvW7c3eLSFnxZAnjWbKSzsY1RJKh4b48Lx44NLbLI47 UX7NeE4t3fGLAcm0OCpQMwt4IXOeYEEE9TBlW1aoWw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AIpwx49tc0U4eCLNguoy784dl/xkGLdTD0p0qqbEquGRlPZJzlhBzJm9SPB7BE8qfS5ejSgDuOp1zfzcfBtFzVuG10Y= X-Received: by 10.13.196.70 with SMTP id g67mr3780131ywd.387.1522291973604; Wed, 28 Mar 2018 19:52:53 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: lists@eitanadler.com Received: by 2002:a5b:990:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Wed, 28 Mar 2018 19:52:23 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <201803290249.w2T2n6Hq060412@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net> References: <20180329022626.GP81123@FreeBSD.org> <201803290249.w2T2n6Hq060412@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net> From: Eitan Adler Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2018 19:52:23 -0700 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 2Q7aeJa9aWbN6A9xY0dfUyU21eA Message-ID: Subject: Re: Mismerge at r330897 in stable/11, Audit report To: rgrimes@freebsd.org Cc: Glen Barber , src-committers , svn-src-all@freebsd.org, svn-src-stable@freebsd.org, svn-src-stable-11@freebsd.org, FreeBSD Release Engineering Team Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-BeenThere: svn-src-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.25 Precedence: list List-Id: SVN commit messages for all the -stable branches of the src tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2018 02:52:55 -0000 On 28 March 2018 at 19:49, Rodney W. Grimes wrote: >> On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 07:17:20PM -0700, Eitan Adler wrote: >> > On 28 March 2018 at 19:04, Rodney W. Grimes >> > wrote: >> > >> On 28 March 2018 at 18:35, Rodney W. Grimes >> > >> wrote: >> > >> >> >> Hi! >> > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> This part of the MFC is wrong: >> > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> https://svnweb.freebsd.org/base/stable/11/sys/sys/random.h?limit_changes=0&r1=330897&r2=330896&pathrev=330897 >> > >> > >> > >> > Can we try to identify exactly what rXXXXXX that is a merge of? >> > >> > >> > >> >> >> Could you please MFC back the other random related changes too? Some >> > >> >> >> of them made by cem@. >> > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> On 3/14/18, Eitan Adler wrote: >> > >> >> >>> Author: eadler >> > >> >> >>> Date: Wed Mar 14 03:19:51 2018 >> > >> >> >>> New Revision: 330897 >> > >> >> >>> URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/330897 >> > >> >> >>> >> > >> >> >>> Log: >> > >> >> >>> Partial merge of the SPDX changes >> > >> >> >>> >> > >> >> >>> These changes are incomplete but are making it difficult >> > >> >> >>> to determine what other changes can/should be merged. >> > >> >> >>> >> > >> >> >>> No objections from: pfg >> > >> >> >>> >> > >> >> > Am I missing something? If this MFC was supposed to be of the SPDX >> > >> >> > license tagging, why does it have any functional changes? >> > >> >> > >> > >> >> > Especially changes to random(4)? >> > >> >> >> > >> >> This was my failure. I only spot checked & compile-checked the diff >> > >> >> since I expected all changes to be comments/SPDX. >> > >> >> >> > >> >> However, I must have gotten carried away and included a few too many >> > >> >> revisions. Unfortunately some people have already merged fixes to my >> > >> >> failure and thus this can't be reverted as is without also reverting >> > >> >> those fixes. >> > >> >> >> > >> >> That said, I should do that since this commit message is utterly wrong. >> > >> > >> > >> > We do not have to revert r330897, with what follows I think >> > >> > we can easily find the revisions to revert from stable/11. >> > >> > ... >> > >> >> > >> While we don't have to revert it I'd rather do so than have bogus history. >> > > >> > > Reverting wont remove that history, thats a one way deal, >> > > and I think if we revert the bogus merges with the wrong >> > > history thats as good as its gona get. >> > > >> > >> >> > >> >From a look it seems the following was also merged: >> > >> r316370, r317095, r324394, and a few others. >> > >> >> > >> Is there a reason you don't want me to revert the changes? >> > > >> > > Repository churn is my main concern. >> > > >> > > It touches 6000+ files some of which have probably >> > > been touched since. A very carefull pre commit >> > > audit would need to be done. >> > > >> > > Then another commit to 6000+ files to put it back, >> > > also needing a pre-commit audit. (Pretty easy now >> > > that I have a filter.) >> > >> > I'm actually using the same filter you pasted above to verify that my >> > changes are only reverting said files. That said, while I'd prefer to >> > revert, I'll defer to others if they have a differing opinion. >> > >> > >> > Note that I won't have access my dev box after tomorrow for about a week. >> > >> >> IMHO, if you are going to be away for over a week while we're headed >> directly into the 11.2 release cycle, revert the change. What you >> committed is not what was intended, clearly, and the commit message does >> not reflect what had happened (as you noted). >> >> Any disagreements on this decision should be directed to me specifically >> in this case. > > Glen, > I would rather not revert, as I believe that would cause more > damages as people have already cleaned up some of the mis merge from > this commit. I am pretty sure a revert would lead to a broken tree. > > In Eitans absence I am willing to take responsiblity to untangle > the wrong bits and clean up stable/11. > > Ok? > > Eitan, > Are you ok with that as well? Yes. I also thank everyone who has helped me get out of this mess. My current action plan: do nothing -- Eitan Adler Source, Ports, Doc committer Bugmeister, Ports Security teams