From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp-out1.suse.de (smtp-out1.suse.de [195.135.223.130]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1F6F9197A8E for ; Tue, 16 Jul 2024 12:20:11 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=195.135.223.130 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1721132414; cv=none; b=MZfoaRFTs/a93h536Gwuv7ATQGx0R3o0Eis2HDWmmKnHkDzNy365cH1FLs48A81cbCOR8Wb3Q8O3WZIAnBfDkKqStziYhjafYuYWUXsPXoC0C/eE3xviawk1uhRA18LhjCFIK6nFeugvCSrkLA3UwrMGY1mgtWopQCSJm8Bexv4= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1721132414; c=relaxed/simple; bh=5P98M+xqAfHFhVGjhS6UUB7jkM4XWVsYQK/GVZav6fk=; h=Date:Message-ID:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=QnLUy7+YyRtY5zpaEPf7fBSCjp36rZKwOLzhE7jOToJZ8clVbpMLQ1HWFl2rmWSKx/oLVqQc/E/Vu+QZpmKuKJxnAezeyI4qRq2tSywrtKhlK81NLsSds17XB8U555k9qMgwGqCdMpuiOw9C+D7K4Cw/BSiSFFqg+EeCyqFV0qQ= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=suse.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=suse.de; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=suse.de header.i=@suse.de header.b=tWnMZUxJ; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=suse.de header.i=@suse.de header.b=MoibYTfh; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=suse.de header.i=@suse.de header.b=tWnMZUxJ; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=suse.de header.i=@suse.de header.b=MoibYTfh; arc=none smtp.client-ip=195.135.223.130 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=suse.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=suse.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=suse.de header.i=@suse.de header.b="tWnMZUxJ"; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=suse.de header.i=@suse.de header.b="MoibYTfh"; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=suse.de header.i=@suse.de header.b="tWnMZUxJ"; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=suse.de header.i=@suse.de header.b="MoibYTfh" Received: from imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org [IPv6:2a07:de40:b281:104:10:150:64:97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-out1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 30A5221B2F; Tue, 16 Jul 2024 12:20:10 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_rsa; t=1721132410; h=from:from:reply-to: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=Gn82iWTkNzrDT4j1IONzdxqa12oy8WGn5IaGsT9Xm10=; b=tWnMZUxJ1MH0vn8vUhr1OA7i/Ndd1Rx0ejUHRY0eXH++KRuxlE13Gbcr0+W6oM7rv7VXbU FIlS748weWLYg4ZgvpWfCqw0twNyAcSxnBz4kqobjPXlsuSmUWAdsX6VboLwpb8BFqGb9m F4UiUvsgJX00wOfwej89T8skT6VIs5I= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1721132410; h=from:from:reply-to: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=Gn82iWTkNzrDT4j1IONzdxqa12oy8WGn5IaGsT9Xm10=; b=MoibYTfhlTD/Bi4oSc6TwzhLc1tg1GFV0pkj1HBe0PoT7mIah4Hl3P55NUbJuSNGI4nxIU W7W3nKa34pebsmAw== Authentication-Results: smtp-out1.suse.de; dkim=pass header.d=suse.de header.s=susede2_rsa header.b=tWnMZUxJ; dkim=pass header.d=suse.de header.s=susede2_ed25519 header.b=MoibYTfh DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_rsa; t=1721132410; h=from:from:reply-to: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=Gn82iWTkNzrDT4j1IONzdxqa12oy8WGn5IaGsT9Xm10=; b=tWnMZUxJ1MH0vn8vUhr1OA7i/Ndd1Rx0ejUHRY0eXH++KRuxlE13Gbcr0+W6oM7rv7VXbU FIlS748weWLYg4ZgvpWfCqw0twNyAcSxnBz4kqobjPXlsuSmUWAdsX6VboLwpb8BFqGb9m F4UiUvsgJX00wOfwej89T8skT6VIs5I= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1721132410; h=from:from:reply-to: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=Gn82iWTkNzrDT4j1IONzdxqa12oy8WGn5IaGsT9Xm10=; b=MoibYTfhlTD/Bi4oSc6TwzhLc1tg1GFV0pkj1HBe0PoT7mIah4Hl3P55NUbJuSNGI4nxIU W7W3nKa34pebsmAw== Received: from imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F2E4D136E5; Tue, 16 Jul 2024 12:20:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dovecot-director2.suse.de ([2a07:de40:b281:106:10:150:64:167]) by imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org with ESMTPSA id nUoVOnlllmYOVAAAD6G6ig (envelope-from ); Tue, 16 Jul 2024 12:20:09 +0000 Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2024 14:20:42 +0200 Message-ID: <87frs91qat.wl-tiwai@suse.de> From: Takashi Iwai To: Greg KH Cc: Dmitry Torokhov , Dan Carpenter , Theodore Ts'o , Sasha Levin , James Bottomley , ksummit@lists.linux.dev Subject: Re: Proposal: Enhancing Commit Tagging for Stable Kernel Branches In-Reply-To: <2024071605-bulb-plop-9cea@gregkh> References: <915ef4884d0cd347a1e0c87584346c764f7a11cf.camel@HansenPartnership.com> <20240715180000.GC70013@mit.edu> <2024071605-bulb-plop-9cea@gregkh> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/27.2 Mule/6.0 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: ksummit@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 30A5221B2F X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 1.99 X-Spam-Level: * X-Rspamd-Server: rspamd2.dmz-prg2.suse.org X-Spamd-Result: default: False [1.99 / 50.00]; SUSPICIOUS_RECIPS(1.50)[]; MID_CONTAINS_FROM(1.00)[]; R_DKIM_ALLOW(-0.20)[suse.de:s=susede2_rsa,suse.de:s=susede2_ed25519]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.20)[-1.000]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; MX_GOOD(-0.01)[]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; DKIM_SIGNED(0.00)[suse.de:s=susede2_rsa,suse.de:s=susede2_ed25519]; FUZZY_BLOCKED(0.00)[rspamd.com]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; RBL_SPAMHAUS_BLOCKED_OPENRESOLVER(0.00)[2a07:de40:b281:104:10:150:64:97:from]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; FREEMAIL_ENVRCPT(0.00)[gmail.com]; FREEMAIL_CC(0.00)[gmail.com,linaro.org,mit.edu,kernel.org,hansenpartnership.com,lists.linux.dev]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; DNSWL_BLOCKED(0.00)[2a07:de40:b281:104:10:150:64:97:from,2a07:de40:b281:106:10:150:64:167:received]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; SPAMHAUS_XBL(0.00)[2a07:de40:b281:104:10:150:64:97:from]; RCPT_COUNT_SEVEN(0.00)[7]; TAGGED_RCPT(0.00)[]; RECEIVED_SPAMHAUS_BLOCKED_OPENRESOLVER(0.00)[2a07:de40:b281:106:10:150:64:167:received]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[suse.de:+]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; DBL_BLOCKED_OPENRESOLVER(0.00)[imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org:helo,imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org:rdns,suse.de:dkim] X-Rspamd-Action: no action X-Spamd-Bar: + On Tue, 16 Jul 2024 08:28:53 +0200, Greg KH wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 15, 2024 at 01:47:14PM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 15, 2024 at 02:06:55PM -0500, Dan Carpenter wrote: > > > On Mon, Jul 15, 2024 at 02:00:00PM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > > > > On Sun, Jul 14, 2024 at 04:18:00PM -0400, Sasha Levin wrote: > > > > > From my experience, most issues tracked by regzbot and fixed upstream > > > > > don't actually have a stable tag. Here's one I just looked at a few days > > > > > ago: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=f451fd97dd2b78f286379203a47d9d295c467255 > > > > > > > > > > And I'm actually happy to point to that one as an example because the > > > > > ext4 folks are usually great about stable tags. > > > > > > > > > > Should we have not taken that commit? > > > > > > > > Yep, that's just a mistake on our (my) part; you should have taken > > > > that commit, and my thanks for taking it without asking us. > > > > > > > > That being said, maybe one path forward is that the stable team > > > > *should* be asking the subsystem maintainers about. "Hey, the > > > > following commits appear to be backported, but you didn't add a cc: > > > > stable. We plan to backport them unless you complain." This has the > > > > benefit of giving feedback to the subsystem maintainers that they they > > > > missed tagging some number of commits, which might remind them to do > > > > better, or make them decide that they want to do something more > > > > explicit, such as have their own stable backports initiative ala XFS. > > > > > > > > More generally, it seems to me that we are conflating multiple issues > > > > here in this discussion which may be making it harder for us make > > > > progress on the question. > > > > > > > > 1) There are some subsystems who don't care about tagging commits, > > > > either Fixes: or Cc: stable, or both; > > > > > > > > 2) There are subsystems which are trying to appropriately tag commits, but: > > > > a) Sometimes they will make a mistake, and forget to cc: stable > > > > b) Sometimes it's too hard (tm) to figure out what is the commit which > > > > introduces the regression, so they either make up something (e.g., > > > > hmm, it looks like commit XYZ changes one of the line that is touched > > > > by the patch, so ), or they will add a Cc: stable but > > > > not supply a Fixes: tag > > > > > > Too hard doesn't work as an excuse because someone has to figure it out, > > > and it may as well be the subsystem expert. > > > > > > I've already added a checkpatch warning when people CC stable but don't > > > include a Fixes tag. I also plan to start going back to maintainers > > > and manually asking them for Fixes tags. This will be attached to the > > > patch.msgid.link URL so the stable tooling can pick up Fixes tags which > > > are added later. > > > > > > The one question I have is for patches which pre-date git. I was told > > > to leave the Fixes tag off in that case, but I think that's out of date. > > > It's more useful to say "Fixes: 1da177e4c3f4 ("Linux-2.6.12-rc2")". > > > > If a thing was there since before git and only now is being discovered > > it either needs to be explicitly marked for stable with cc: or we can > > just keep the fix in newer kernels. IMO this particular "Fixes" tag does > > not bring any value. > > On the contrary, if I see just a "cc: stable" and no "Fixes:" tag, I do > a "best effort" to backport to all current stable/lts trees. If it > fails on 5.15 and older, great, I don't warn anyone about that as there > was no Fixes: tag for me to know how far back it should go. That's what I expected for the cases I put only Cc-to-stable; they have been mostly some trivial quirks only for new devices, and the stuff that can be taken safely when applicable -- otherwise just skip. thanks, Takashi