From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-pg1-f182.google.com (mail-pg1-f182.google.com [209.85.215.182]) (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 65C651369B1 for ; Mon, 15 Jul 2024 20:47:18 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.215.182 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1721076439; cv=none; b=j0huIy3XjA1tu5wJSmQj6hZ95Zcdeqxfnsu+p48qXf4Puc/JoiFFfb2/1cUnBLIqPoI/Bc/Q7nfkMcfS5DoPBzy/A38cs7cm3BvGcT8xRsK3fLsVUswK1osE55CsXt4k0GNVJ+6b5UuN27yGbcOUyN3pjgTpi9TVNx0mTb35KVI= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1721076439; c=relaxed/simple; bh=c4MPNDdpLYaZa9Hn+JriemCmIAIMF+eX5rlaDJ/Htn0=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=WANePTBw0e1jiwRtGyB3SpIVqLys/B3eO4kS2tYL1A32kDbfIEsYeT94wHEYDZtIHd7wDAL+MBkB3ibuWfZ9lI2WlsgS820swnrbUkbscpuUZaUPYnHZvEg44vYqtp6z1lzhJ3ju+UiyJ/WYvlb5CgJcI81WGrXBxnFCNn137Wk= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b=PD03v/T/; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.215.182 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="PD03v/T/" Received: by mail-pg1-f182.google.com with SMTP id 41be03b00d2f7-75e7e110e89so2736240a12.3 for ; Mon, 15 Jul 2024 13:47:18 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1721076437; x=1721681237; darn=lists.linux.dev; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=1L6QS7UnA9mhEjmsRvV02NmmiCtD4P/miK4rnoHRBnY=; b=PD03v/T/gqgM1xi5K9b0TITc4fSa2gzW8+vZcebDd39Hn8PazWpIH2pdplBNnTJOGE 7Gdb9PqM+lVwbA8vsNgxZOjlTyt9+FOOE8McfIlyKXEAAV4zmsE2Rn9orSlF5UZZA5+5 w91iNi26N6sv8+1FtIxULIvgWETu+tQZrGW8MTqTsbJBvKNiFCukmR8jSZwUn9U4DkaX v7eHxux+zwkN3Zl8WZmaPpDvA1JsMnOWwzYdhVsyEflutmw0Wk4tmKMAxfzcM6zZypBu B5f5hlV2KxEdVhhJVOdrO3ThxNKwjDL9/yTwep/7maXa7/f6GTxuPul/Snjln8VnEB1O MdPg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1721076437; x=1721681237; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=1L6QS7UnA9mhEjmsRvV02NmmiCtD4P/miK4rnoHRBnY=; b=f0rGLCU1tERiFHUyH/xguHEuCOfmB9rfziIAIzyO5tFsW/mVecubP1TZYKe6RDCCEY 2IWuCvt/h+RvYRFT93Kj7GJanMlbP4yVDaMFqR3nhE5USe55LGkIuTzYjMVNxh0jP4um Y8egGIudLY6Mxs+IPuVZ3pG9UZtlwoDMrjZbhWnCQDMjuWHLNZGXpRdGN9rBZCxqSmDV pLnwYIBSlS0MPKsk96XpKvJf5rHSelNLv5Q85LEgL2Ioz8lNDAqftYYZAu1I57QWkf4p yHydYbLyUV7EoyAFAtKZjGAZpW6aJKfmGUANygyqk03XssctYi1bgqHxqNFmYYECuP+3 cYzQ== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCWN145uVstKiwUVTyFnmpgE3mgUqSFWO2zkliC8CT1zHgbol2Tr7YIhIeiGaIxtxZ7nC6Zr6ktj8BVfg6+BeJPnDMnOGGA0Og== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YykHWH5CAFUkQN9FwzjFWDuO1mQbQKje6dmPx1isSWZh2Vqt/cp XqGuu6oFRuLb3cNCiyfBqJgar8oMEqLa4fZdSQdrg0H61b/zPpSB X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IEtALjFcu8NPU7r/X1zwG5xU4OkVth++WKATsiIEHklsgotGiYxkf9WiNojrYHMGEN5P249dg== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6a20:72a2:b0:1c2:8d16:c684 with SMTP id adf61e73a8af0-1c3f122f8e8mr118777637.21.1721076437378; Mon, 15 Jul 2024 13:47:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from google.com ([2620:15c:9d:2:6d45:d4db:b14d:ea69]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d9443c01a7336-1fc0bc50a4asm45029675ad.283.2024.07.15.13.47.16 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 15 Jul 2024 13:47:17 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2024 13:47:14 -0700 From: Dmitry Torokhov To: Dan Carpenter Cc: Theodore Ts'o , Sasha Levin , James Bottomley , ksummit@lists.linux.dev, Greg KH Subject: Re: Proposal: Enhancing Commit Tagging for Stable Kernel Branches Message-ID: References: <915ef4884d0cd347a1e0c87584346c764f7a11cf.camel@HansenPartnership.com> <20240715180000.GC70013@mit.edu> 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: 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. Thanks. -- Dmitry