Re: [PATCH 1/1] mm/nommu: remove unnecessary VMA locking

[David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>]

>>
>> Just a general comment: usually, if review of the original series is
>> still going on, it makes a lot more sense to raise such things in the
>> original series so the author can fixup while things are still in
>> mm-unstable. Once the series is in mm-stable, it's a different story. In
>> that case, it is usually good to have the mail subjects be something
>> like  "[PATCH mm-stable 1/1] ...".
> 
> Ok... For my education, do you mean the title of this patch should
> somehow reflect that it should be folded into the original patch? Just
> trying to understand the actionable item here. How would you change
> this patch when posting for mm-unstable and for mm-stable?

For patches that fixup something in mm-stable (stable commit ID but not 
yet master -> we cannot squash anymore so we need separate commits), 
it's good to include "mm-stable". The main difference to patches that 
target master is that by indicating "mm-stable", everyone knows that 
this is not broken in some upstream/production kernel.


For patches that fixup something that is in mm-unstable (no stable 
commit ID -> still under review and fixup easily possible), IMHO we 
distinguish between two cases:

(1) You fixup your own patches: simply send the fixup as reply to the 
original patch. Andrew will pick it up and squash it before including it 
in mm-stable. Sometimes a complete resend of a series makes sense instead.

(2) You fixup patches from someone else: simply raise it as a review 
comment in reply to the original patch. It might make sense to send a 
patch, but usually you just raise the issue to the patch author as a 
review comment and the author will address that. Again, Andrew will pick 
it up and squash it before moving it to mm-stable.


That way, it's clearer when stumbling over patches on the mailing list 
if they fix a real issue in upstream, fix a issue in 
soon-to-be-upstream, or are simply part of a WIP series that is still 
under review.

-- 
Thanks,

David / dhildenb