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 984D8412 for ; Fri, 26 Aug 2016 13:44:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from omzsmtpe02.verizonbusiness.com (omzsmtpe02.verizonbusiness.com [199.249.25.209]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DFD6AA7 for ; Fri, 26 Aug 2016 13:44:53 +0000 (UTC) From: "Levin, Alexander" To: Greg KH Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2016 09:44:46 -0400 Message-ID: <20160826134446.GC25341@sasha-lappy> References: <20160826044651.GA25341@sasha-lappy> <20160826112635.GA27627@kroah.com> <20160826114205.GA16682@jhogan-linux.le.imgtec.org> <20160826115653.GA28645@kroah.com> In-Reply-To: <20160826115653.GA28645@kroah.com> Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: "ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org" , "Levin, Alexander" Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] Self nomination - Sasha Levin List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 07:56:53AM -0400, Greg KH wrote: > On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 12:42:05PM +0100, James Hogan wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 01:26:35PM +0200, Greg KH wrote: > > > On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 12:46:51AM -0400, Levin, Alexander wrote: > > > > - Improving tagging for stable. The "version tag" option is brok= en > > > > and the "Fixes:" tag is always preferable, how do we get people = to > > > > use that more often? (script it somehow? > > > > scripts/find-version-it-fixes ?). > > >=20 > > > Oh a script like that would be nice, but how would that work in reali= ty? > >=20 > > Not all Fixes: tags are suitable for stable though. I've been caught ou= t > > by patches being applied to stable (4.2 maybe) due to a Fixes tag, > > without prerequisite patches being applied. >=20 > Yeah, it is true, but it gives me a hint as to where I should stop at, > or where I should look around at. If I see a "3.14" mark, and the patch > doesn't apply at all there, then I'll push back on the developer of the > patch to see if they can provide a version for that kernel. If I don't > have that mark, and it doesn't apply to 3.14, I'll just drop it on the > floor as "obviously" it doesn't apply there. Yup, I fully agree that "Fixes:" doesn't guarantee that the commit is stabl= e material, but in reality neither does the stable@ tag. It's just another marker for us. What I was originally talking about is "cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # vX.Y+"= vs "Fixes: hash ("subject"): It's obvious that for and commit that fixes somet= hing there's another commit that broke that thing, but it's also possible that t= hat commit that broke something fixed something else and made it's way into sta= ble. Therefore, by using version tags instead of "Fixes:" we have a very good ch= ance of missing the fact that a certain commit might need to be applied to older stable trees as well. --=20 Thanks, Sasha=