lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2026]   [May]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
Subjectkconfirm: patch reporting guidelines?
Hi Greg,


*Question 1: should I acknowledge the kconfirm tool in my patches?

I've received a wide range of feedback as I've been submitting patches
from kconfirm findings. For example, Lorenzo thanked me for
acknowledging the tool when submitting a patch:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/bfdfdb05-77e2-455d-b68d-9da3fd9d1c0d@lucifer.local/

and on the other hand, Alexander asked me not to refer to the tool
until it is moved into the tree:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/3ec20142-09d1-436f-a623-21a2440ef7f0-agordeev@linux.ibm.com/


*Question 2: do bugs in kconfig deserve a Fixes tag?

I've found a few instances of dead default statements, which should not
be dead. Fortunately, these just involve the kunit tests. Nothing
crazy.

I previously sent out this patch for powerpc, which has passed 2
reviewers and 1 tester, and none of them have objected to the Fixes tag:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260405161545.161006-1-julianbraha@gmail.com/

and on the other hand, Alexander says that this is "no real issue" and
doesn't deserve a Fixes tag:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/3ec20142-09d1-436f-a623-21a2440ef7f0-agordeev@linux.ibm.com/

- Julian Braha

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2026-05-06 19:09    [W:0.092 / U:2.933 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and my Meterkast|Read the blog