On Tue, Sep 9, 2025 at 11:01 AM Linus Torvalds <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Tue, 9 Sept 2025 at 10:56, Alexei Starovoitov > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > It doesn't work reliably. Often enough maintainers massage the patch > > a bit while applying to fix minor nits and patch-id will be different. > > Honestly, if you massage a patch you should probably mention it. > > THAT is the kind of thing where it actually makes sense to say > "modified version of XYZ" and pointing to the original. > > Look, at that point it's actually *IMPORTANT* to explicitly state that > you didn't actually apply the original patch.
and I did in the email reply (as you could see in the lore link). That's what we always do. Email is the way to communicate such changes. Sometimes we rewrite the commit log too to reduce verbosity, fix typos or whatever. Without direct email reply developers don't notice that commit was tweaked. The point is that 'git patch-id --stable' is not reliable.
