From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from relay1-d.mail.gandi.net (relay1-d.mail.gandi.net [217.70.183.193]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 75BBF18EA84 for ; Mon, 15 Jul 2024 14:34:22 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.70.183.193 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1721054065; cv=none; b=UA5PvuEDqIv38HQhhy1BnMhPJntTvzNeYF5VIQsu2ht7XFnlgTg+JKCA7Tp44Q5QDcMSn0gnkjm9aOZ5VICWU54vIYeewMsufu//AtLVu5v3WRAUOMcZ2kVBy/j3tu5yJmUACnMk6jK5vHWlDaIWHm+qNujT2RuePSJN+69p/8I= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1721054065; c=relaxed/simple; bh=PkH0fWSTovV4mHqR5yQqv+1yHaAeYFCML8U4sSrGD60=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=VOu8TmEZGtXoseX7QkWu0BNSekYOrZS03DtK446HALOW/M5rU653PbueQ92vstSvl11yWvkukmZ+QDG6w2+nxY8AophjNjKiIPZOYFPf5+fyzVJg2WOO4ea6TD6Gsh0GhufLMaySYdxWdRULPpHwSim1bI1/FYPCrSHSiv/Q+m8= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=bootlin.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=bootlin.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=bootlin.com header.i=@bootlin.com header.b=QMaaXWB1; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.70.183.193 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=bootlin.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=bootlin.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=bootlin.com header.i=@bootlin.com header.b="QMaaXWB1" Received: by mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1EF21240002; Mon, 15 Jul 2024 14:34:19 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=bootlin.com; s=gm1; t=1721054060; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=yg/5GEZst3XS4T85Z4UwzJ7UZbT3nkI1nSrBxM+Xnpc=; b=QMaaXWB11cz8Wr1yRNTHizHJZQPORSZtzONH1SHTa6KabR6aYBqGnJEOqRrykrOJqNCQdZ Tu9tFjahCTJ0/yOykWuX46QHoCZsmLP4tqU+iJh0B/GlidqE8KovR3qaB5XipR80jHi+g4 gGlx596IO9BPGjMJzuqiGmPcYcljesUWWUvdMqS/qTiQnR9ai7FJneeAuNsorSZYNQXztS MMWAfsRkuKyCgaTuu5HrSiLo0W597QNrFrWTzfwskFJjRbod3GUAe/6Mkqnq4+t7RCfyvs v6FELm6yO1LIWRxR6+NYsQG8Eh9wI47utjOVH5HB/CODF7y23+leEhRDmg2Zow== Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2024 16:34:19 +0200 From: Alexandre Belloni To: Mimi Zohar Cc: Greg KH , Linus Torvalds , James Bottomley , Sasha Levin , ksummit@lists.linux.dev Subject: Re: Proposal: Enhancing Commit Tagging for Stable Kernel Branches Message-ID: <202407151434198c3715e9@mail.local> References: <0e6c7c8ed259dcb50631c6fdc3d86d3080bdc6f3.camel@HansenPartnership.com> <2024071528-cahoots-reacquire-9eab@gregkh> <3a357a63f67f3e6aff5e6d020d40b51fa24e0280.camel@linux.ibm.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: ksummit@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-GND-Sasl: alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com On 15/07/2024 08:52:54-0400, Mimi Zohar wrote: > On Mon, 2024-07-15 at 08:48 -0400, Mimi Zohar wrote: > > On Mon, 2024-07-15 at 10:02 +0200, Greg KH wrote: > > > On Sun, Jul 14, 2024 at 04:09:06PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > > On Sun, 14 Jul 2024 at 16:06, James Bottomley > > > > wrote: > > > > > But we know how to enforce a unified view of process: we document it in > > > > > Documentaion/process ... > > > > > > > > Hahhahhahaahh. > > > > > > > > Ahh, you're such a kidder, James. > > > > > > Yeah, and that's the issue here, we have whole subsystems and many many > > > maintainers and developers that do not follow this at all, hence our > > > need to pull into stable commits that only have a "Fixes:" tag on it. > > > > > > Now we can start running a bot on all submissions that says something > > > like the one that I have been doing for the USB subsystem for the past > > > few months, here's the text I use: > > > > > > - You have marked a patch with a "Fixes:" tag for a commit that is in an > > > older released kernel, yet you do not have a cc: stable line in the > > > signed-off-by area at all, which means that the patch will not be > > > applied to any older kernel releases. To properly fix this, please > > > follow the documented rules in the > > > Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst file for how to resolve > > > this. > > > > > > But I doubt everyone wants to see that polute their mailing lists :( > > > > > > Anyway, if people want to stick to the current, documented, process, > > > great, but as-is, trying to get people to follow that is rough and not > > > really working. > > > > Sigh, I'm one of them, but I'd like to move to backporting "stable" only. > > Unfortunately, the more that you backport "Fixes:" the less likely maintainers > > (me) will remember to Cc stable. Other than email, is there a way of letting > > you and Sasha know to only backport those with "Stable"?. Instead of sending > > the email above to everyone, only send it maintainers who don't Cc stable > > properly/haven't notified you that they will. The emails should get everyone > > else's attention. :) > > Basically, reward good behavior, penalize bad behavior. I'm very surprised that it didn't cross anyone's mind yet that contributors and maintainers don't bother using Cc: stable because they don't care about stable for various reasons. So the behaviour is nether good nor bad and doesn't have to be penalized. -- Alexandre Belloni, co-owner and COO, Bootlin Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering https://bootlin.com