Re: [MAINTAINERS SUMMIT] Any feedback for -next?

Mark Brown <[email protected]> Thu, 13 Aug 2026 12:25:47 +0100

Newsgroups	dev.linux.lists.ksummit,org.kernel.vger.linux-next
Message-ID	<[email protected]>

On Thu, Aug 13, 2026 at 11:59:19AM +0200, Thierry Reding wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 12, 2026 at 04:42:21AM -0700, Breno Leitao wrote:

> > Would getting rid of these ephemeral commits make linux-next easier
> > to work with?

> I think this is a problem that we can easily address using tools. next
> already has scripts to detect these issues and I think perhaps we can
> provide a variant of those in a way that would allow people to set them
> up in their tree as maybe git hooks so they automatically get run on
> pre-push or something.

Krzysztof Kozlowski did a bunch of scripts/hooks that the soc tree
people use, that's probably an easy thing for people to integrate,
though since I don't have the URL to hand I guess it needs more
publicity.

> On the trees that I maintain, I do that using a set of scripts that I've
> found useful. I know many other maintainers do their own versions of the
> same tests and I suspect the maintainers that don't are in the category
> of not knowing that they should be checking for these thing or just
> don't know how or lack the time/motivation to set this up. If we can
> take some of the lessons learned from linux-next and distill it into
> some scripts and maybe documentation, I think we can catch the vast
> majority of these cases, and the rest we can catch in linux-next, or we
> can ask Linus to run this set of sanity checks on merges as a last
> resort.

TBH given the volume of commits the error rate is very low.

signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 488 B)