From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wr0-f197.google.com (mail-wr0-f197.google.com [209.85.128.197]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A37076B026E for ; Mon, 16 Apr 2018 12:10:18 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-wr0-f197.google.com with SMTP id i4so13603681wrh.4 for ; Mon, 16 Apr 2018 09:10:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz (atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz. [195.113.26.193]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id j20si4979855wme.167.2018.04.16.09.10.17 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 16 Apr 2018 09:10:17 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 18:10:15 +0200 From: Pavel Machek Subject: Re: [PATCH AUTOSEL for 4.14 015/161] printk: Add console owner and waiter logic to load balance console writes Message-ID: <20180416161015.GB7071@amd> References: <20180409001936.162706-1-alexander.levin@microsoft.com> <20180409001936.162706-15-alexander.levin@microsoft.com> <20180409082246.34hgp3ymkfqke3a4@pathway.suse.cz> <20180415144248.GP2341@sasha-vm> <20180416093058.6edca0bb@gandalf.local.home> <20180416113629.2474ae74@gandalf.local.home> <20180416160200.GY2341@sasha-vm> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="rS8CxjVDS/+yyDmU" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180416160200.GY2341@sasha-vm> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Sasha Levin Cc: Steven Rostedt , Linus Torvalds , Petr Mladek , "stable@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "akpm@linux-foundation.org" , "linux-mm@kvack.org" , Cong Wang , Dave Hansen , Johannes Weiner , Mel Gorman , Michal Hocko , Vlastimil Babka , Peter Zijlstra , Jan Kara , Mathieu Desnoyers , Tetsuo Handa , Byungchul Park , Tejun Heo --rS8CxjVDS/+yyDmU Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon 2018-04-16 16:02:03, Sasha Levin wrote: > On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 11:36:29AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > >On Mon, 16 Apr 2018 08:18:09 -0700 > >Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > >> On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 6:30 AM, Steven Rostedt = wrote: > >> > > >> > I wonder if the "AUTOSEL" patches should at least have an "ack-by" f= rom > >> > someone before they are pulled in. Otherwise there may be some subtle > >> > issues that can find their way into stable releases. > >> > >> I don't know about anybody else, but I get so many of the patch-bot > >> patches for stable etc that I will *not* reply to normal cases. Only > >> if there's some issue with a patch will I reply. > >> > >> I probably do get more than most, but still - requiring active > >> participation for the steady flow of normal stable patches is almost > >> pointless. > >> > >> Just look at the subject line of this thread. The numbers are so big > >> that you almost need exponential notation for them. > >> > > > >I'm worried about just backporting patches that nobody actually looked > >at. Is someone going through and vetting that these should definitely > >be added to stable. I would like to have some trusted human (doesn't > >even need to be the author or maintainer of the patch) to look at all > >the patches before they are applied. >=20 > I do go through every single commit sent this way and review it. > Sometimes things slip by, but it's not a fully automatic process. >=20 > Let's look at this patch as a concrete example: the only reason, > according to the stable rules, that it shouldn't go in -stable is that > it's longer than 100 lines. >=20 > Otherwise, it fixes a bug, it doesn't introduce any new features, it's > upstream, and so on. It had some fixes that went upstream as well? > Great, let's grab those as well. >=20 > >I would say anything more than a trivial patch would require author or > >sub maintainer ack. Look at this patch, I don't think it should go to > >stable, even though it does fix issues. But the fix is for systems > >already having issues, and this keeps printk from making things worse. > >The fix has side effects that other commits have addressed, and if this > >patch gets backported, those other ones must too. >=20 > Sure, let's get those patches in as well. >=20 > One of the things Greg is pushing strongly for is "bug compatibility": > we want the kernel to behave the same way between mainline and stable. > If the code is broken, it should be broken in the same way. Maybe Greg should be Cced on this conversation? Anyway, I don't think "bug compatibility" is a good goal. Pavel --=20 (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blo= g.html --rS8CxjVDS/+yyDmU Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iEYEARECAAYFAlrUyucACgkQMOfwapXb+vKsLgCgkBwiBshOxVG9qEz4hcJr4E+h RBIAniyDsb9f2LcoUr2MS3ZSknJRu5gK =WpRw -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --rS8CxjVDS/+yyDmU--