On 5/20/2026 9:05 AM, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote: > On 20/5/26 15:09, Markus Armbruster wrote: >> Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <[email protected]> writes: >> >>> On 20/5/26 14:57, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote: >>>> On 20/5/26 14:52, Markus Armbruster wrote: >>>>> Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <[email protected]> writes: >>>>> >>>>>> Fixes: 812b31d3f91 ("configs: rename default-configs to configs >>>>>> and reorganise") >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <[email protected]> >>>>>> --- >>>>>> MAINTAINERS | 2 +- >>>>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >>>>>> >>>>>> diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS >>>>>> index b75f3222f2f..2a4d124fb3c 100644 >>>>>> --- a/MAINTAINERS >>>>>> +++ b/MAINTAINERS >>>>>> @@ -256,7 +256,7 @@ X: target/hexagon/gen_idef_parser_funcs.py >>>>>> F: linux-user/hexagon/ >>>>>> F: tests/tcg/hexagon/ >>>>>> F: disas/hexagon.c >>>>>> -F: configs/targets/hexagon-linux-user/default.mak >>>>>> +F: configs/targets/hexagon-linux-user.mak >>>>>> F: docker/dockerfiles/debian-hexagon-cross.docker >>>>> >>>>> This one's wrong, too. >>>> Already fixed in Alex's tree: >>>> https://lore.kernel.org/qemu-devel/20260518102222.80735-2- >>>> [email protected]/ >>>> Pierrick suggested to repost patch dependencies already queued in >>>> maintainer tree when posting series; while this seem counter >>>> productive it could indeed have saved us time. >>>> >>>>> I have an unsent patch fixing both. In fact, I have an unsent series >>>>> fixing *all* F: patterns that don't resolve to any file. >>> >>> I looked for your series without success, then realized you mentioned >>> it is "unsent". This patch is still valid then. >> >> Yes. >> >>> Why mention unsent >>> work? >> >> To avoid duplicated work. > > I'm not sure this thread is making sense o_O > > Let's try to figure what you meant here. I'm not racing to get > this patch in nor enjoying duplicating work, but this is the > mailing list rules (due to the intrinsic email workflow latency, > not to mention subscriber processing their INBOX in FIFO mode). > > See for example last week at least 3 developers fixed the same > GCC warning issue. Generically, how could we improve that? >
Ideally, by merging such fixes faster (in one hour, not N days). More realistically, having a daily CI job that tests latest (stable) version of compilers before they hit stable distros. This way, all build issues/warnings would never impact anyone. For some bugs, some duplication is inevitable, but it should 99% of those easy build fixes. For the rest, sending "unsent" work seems like an easy fix :). Regards, Pierrick
