Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Wed, 09 May 2012 15:45:58 -0400 (EDT) | | Subject | Re: 3.3.x: e1000 and ixgbe hang | | From | David Miller <> |
| |
From: Wolfgang Walter <wolfgang.walter@stwm.de> Date: Wed, 9 May 2012 18:57:13 +0200
> But when we are at it: I think that when a bug in a stable kernel is > found and the final fix is known it is bad practice to hord that > patch till submission without letting stable@ know about it.
I think you have no idea what goes into vetting patches for -stable.
It can take me days to put together a series, and also I time my -stable submissions with when Linus pulls my 'net' bug fixes into his tree since a part of the -stable requirements is presence in Linus's tree.
I therefore batch, because bleeding out individual fixes one by one to -stable rarely, if ever, makes sense.
And another part of what goes into vetting a patch is time. The longer a patch sits in a non-stable tree getting tested, the more likely any unwanted bugs and side effects will be caught before the patch goes into -stable.
And finally I am under no obligation whatsoever to post some kind of status report to -stable every few days saying when I'll do this or that.
|  |