From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4CAEF723 for ; Thu, 4 Aug 2016 15:45:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mezzanine.sirena.org.uk (mezzanine.sirena.org.uk [106.187.55.193]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AE7E81F5 for ; Thu, 4 Aug 2016 15:45:02 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2016 16:44:44 +0100 From: Mark Brown To: Steven Rostedt Message-ID: <20160804154444.GA10323@sirena.org.uk> References: <20160803110935.GA26270@kroah.com> <87a8guq9y8.fsf@intel.com> <20160803132607.GA31662@kroah.com> <1470232658.2482.42.camel@HansenPartnership.com> <1470233095.2482.46.camel@HansenPartnership.com> <20160803212332.576bb718@grimm.local.home> <20160804082018.GA27204@kroah.com> <20160804093355.30096bbe@gandalf.local.home> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="OXfL5xGRrasGEqWY" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160804093355.30096bbe@gandalf.local.home> Cc: James Bottomley , ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org, Trond Myklebust Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [CORE TOPIC] stable workflow List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , --OXfL5xGRrasGEqWY Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Thu, Aug 04, 2016 at 09:33:55AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > Greg KH wrote: > > No, again, that would put more burden on the maintainer and developer > > than I want to "enforce". I don't even want to do that extra work for > > the trees I maintain, I just couldn't scale that way. > Note, this isn't just good practice for sending patches to stable, it's > general good practice maintaining code. It gives a nice history of a > change. If you look at the change log of code that one might see that > looks "interesting" it may be very educational to see that it was done > as a fix for something else. And a new developer may understand why > code was added in the first place. If it's a choice between me taking a bugfix for mainline and me getting someone to give me a commit ID for exactly which commit introduced some change I'm probably not going to do the latter, especially when a lot of these things are more of the "we now understand the hardware better" variety. > I don't buy this as burden on a maintainer. This should be part of the > maintenance procedure, regardless of sending to stable or not. Yes it > does take extra time, but I don't think that time is wasted. I'm really happy we've got people engaging upstream. I'm happy if people fill in the extra information but really I'm way more interested in a clear changelog than in getting a Fixes tag, or in checking that the tags people are adding are accurate. One thing I've told driver authors before is that the big thing I'm looking at for drivers for hardware which has limited distribution is the impact it has on the subsystem and maintainability - to a great degree if nobody can tell if the driver works there's a limited extent to which I'm going to care about things. That doesn't mean I'm not reviewing at all but there's always a point where I just can't tell. --OXfL5xGRrasGEqWY Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJXo2LrAAoJECTWi3JdVIfQlFgH/i3z/DXfmYnSowBfxruz5Cd6 QhV8Ot1eaxxaMEwOP7tVmdNxb6lPCrAKSRBCcf3wwEzV5KEQheR/Oo0ybdydpUPc K8ibMw0tLCEjWRbzzSOoHkWF8/1QlkPOuT/fZy6OTPpiAz6jyPOOv49rm8FiCaK3 HRXxS69T/cMwqcxPGH+sVMAIMQ2qJggh3bU/31I/LiguVM4xFwtNdHCY5gtiPZ6W Jr3D37rFgC3fiG97NwAd2KdMMFuaQ0WyJQnaryjfGmrBFakoRaviJhy3fS+5iQI3 D+tz2kdHsKbGeMCZ7dWDyZp20c9VP3mUZQIRV+Gl8L93sfdIPHYKiXGXeuynIkg= =MH8/ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --OXfL5xGRrasGEqWY--