lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Jul]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] When to push bug fixes to mainline
On 2013/7/17 4:10, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 03:43:09PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
>> On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 12:11 -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>>
>>> People mark stable patches that way already today with a:
>>> Cc: stable <stable@vger.kernel.org> # delay for 3.12-rc4
>>> or some such wording. I take those and don't apply them until the noted
>>> release happens, so you can do this if needed.

But this is not documented in stable_kernel_rules.txt. And it's not handled
by your automatic scripts?

>>
>> I guess the thing is, are stable patches prone to regressions. Do we
>> just do that for patches that we think are too complex and may cause
>> some harm. Of course, there's the question about having a clue about
>> what patches might cause harm or not.
>
> We'd probably better switch the tag to be "# now" to imply that we don't
> want to delay them, and that by default those merged prior to rc4 are all
> postponed. I suspect that the switching could be mostly automated this way,
> avoiding to add burden to Greg :
>
> - if commit ID >= -rc4
> move to immediate queue, it's a "critical" fix as per Linus' rules
>
> - if Cc: stable line has "now" at the end, move to immediate queue as
> the maintainer takes this reponsibility ;
>
> - otherwise move to the next .2 queue.
>

I like the idea of postpone stable patches by default.



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-07-17 12:42    [W:0.180 / U:0.748 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site