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:4.081 / U:0.016 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site