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 84FD888D for ; Fri, 4 May 2018 17:41:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1A40142D for ; Fri, 4 May 2018 17:41:08 +0000 (UTC) Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 10:40:55 -0700 From: Greg KH To: "Theodore Y. Ts'o" , Jani Nikula , David Howells , Sasha Levin , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org" , "w@1wt.eu" Message-ID: <20180504174055.GF4649@kroah.com> References: <20180502195138.GC18390@sasha-vm> <20180503000620.GA29205@thunk.org> <20180503144612.GJ18390@sasha-vm> <20180503165446.GB30522@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20180503173422.GR18390@sasha-vm> <20180503182039.GC30522@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <8669.1525427874@warthog.procyon.org.uk> <87fu377gbu.fsf@intel.com> <20180504130932.GI29205@thunk.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180504130932.GI29205@thunk.org> Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] bug-introducing patches List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Fri, May 04, 2018 at 09:09:32AM -0400, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote: > On Fri, May 04, 2018 at 03:31:17PM +0300, Jani Nikula wrote: > > On Fri, 04 May 2018, David Howells wrote: > > > Sasha Levin via Ksummit-discuss wrote: > > > > > >> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # commit-id-of-(2) > > > > This has been documented since > > > > commit 8e9b9362266dd16255473c080d846b13e27247bf > > Author: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior > > Date: Sun Dec 6 12:24:31 2009 +0100 > > > > Doc/stable rules: add new cherry-pick logic > > > > in v2.6.33 so seems like there should have been enough time to fix the > > tools. > > The problem is that it's not being *used* that way. In fact, that > documentation is arguably out of date. When it does get used, it's > used to indicate which kernels the stable patch applies. You have to > go pretty far back before you find that suggested usage. Run: > > git log --grep stable@kernel.org | grep -i cc: | grep stable | grep \# > > and see for yourself. The first couple of hits: > > Cc: stable@kernel.org # 3.11 > Cc: stable@kernel.org # 4.8+ > Cc: stable@kernel.org # 4.8+ > Cc: stable@kernel.org # 4.13+ > Cc: stable@kernel.org # 4.8+ > Cc: stable@kernel.org # 4.13 - together with 890da9cf0983 > Cc: stable@kernel.org # 4.13 > Cc: stable@kernel.org # 4.13 > Cc: stable@kernel.org # v4.8+ > Cc: stable@kernel.org # v4.10+ > Cc: stable@kernel.org # v4.10+ > Cc: stable@kernel.org # v4.10+ > Cc: stable@kernel.org # reverted commits were marked for stable > Cc: stable@kernel.org # for the backport of the original commit > Cc: stable@kernel.org # v4.8+ > > At this point, my suggestion would be to delete the text added by the > above-mentioned commit, and add a new syntax. We're much more willing > to support multiple headers, so something like this: > > Stable-prereq: DEADBEEF1234: subsystem: bork bork bork.... > > With multiple Stable-preeq: lines allowed, where the order is > significant, might be one way to do things. Ugh, what? I don't understand what you are proposing here, what we have today is just fine, what is broken with it? thanks, greg k-h