Hi!

> > You've missed the 5.10 mail :)
> 
> You mean in the flood? ;-P
> 
> > Pavel objected to it so I've dropped it: https://lore.kernel.org/all/Zbli7QIGVFT8EtO4@sashalap/
> 
> So we're not backporting those anymore? But everything else? :-P
> 
> And 5.15 has it already...
> 
> Frankly, with the amount of stuff going into stable, I see no problem with
> backporting such patches. Especially if the people using stable kernels will
> end up backporting it themselves and thus multiply work. I.e., Erwan's case.

Well, some people would prefer -stable to only contain fixes for
critical things, as documented.

stable-kernel-rules.rst:

 - It must fix a problem that causes a build error (but not for things
   marked CONFIG_BROKEN), an oops, a hang, data corruption, a real
   security issue, or some "oh, that's not good" issue.  In short, something
   critical.

Now, you are right that reality and documentation are not exactly
"aligned". I don't care much about which one is fixed, but I'd really
like them to match (because that's what our users expect).

Best regards,
								Pavel
-- 
DENX Software Engineering GmbH,        Managing Director: Erika Unter
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]