From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0361C433DF for ; Thu, 4 Jun 2020 16:29:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B78A7206DC for ; Thu, 4 Jun 2020 16:29:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729593AbgFDQ3U (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Jun 2020 12:29:20 -0400 Received: from mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr ([192.134.164.104]:24163 "EHLO mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1729587AbgFDQ3U (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Jun 2020 12:29:20 -0400 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.73,472,1583190000"; d="scan'208";a="350610914" Received: from abo-173-121-68.mrs.modulonet.fr (HELO hadrien) ([85.68.121.173]) by mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 04 Jun 2020 18:29:17 +0200 Date: Thu, 4 Jun 2020 18:29:16 +0200 (CEST) From: Julia Lawall X-X-Sender: jll@hadrien To: Joe Perches cc: Dan Carpenter , Julia Lawall , Linus Walleij , Christophe JAILLET , Robert Jarzmik , Daniel Mack , Haojian Zhuang , Linux ARM , "open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] pinctrl: pxa: pxa2xx: Remove 'pxa2xx_pinctrl_exit()' which is unused and broken In-Reply-To: <0749ac5e3868c6ba50728ced8366bfd86b0b8500.camel@perches.com> Message-ID: References: <20200601183102.GS30374@kadam> <20200604083120.GF22511@kadam> <2aa49a543e6f48a6f428a37b63a06f9149870225.camel@perches.com> <32232229031e02edcc268b1074c9bac44012ee35.camel@perches.com> <10e54ee84bd44171ef329bed9e7e6a946bae61ba.camel@perches.com> <20200604123038.GG22511@kadam> <0749ac5e3868c6ba50728ced8366bfd86b0b8500.camel@perches.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.21 (DEB 202 2017-01-01) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-gpio-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 4 Jun 2020, Joe Perches wrote: > On Thu, 2020-06-04 at 15:30 +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 04, 2020 at 01:42:12PM +0200, Julia Lawall wrote: > > > OK, I recall a discussion with Dan where he suggested that some things > > > that were not actually bug fixes could also merit a Fixes tag. But it's > > > probably better if he weighs in directly. > > > > I generally think Fixes should only be used for "real bug" fixes. > > > > The one exception is when I'm reviewing a patch that fixes an "unused > > assignment" static checker warning is that I know which commit > > introduced the warning. I don't have strong feelings if it's in the > > Fixes tag or if it's just mentioned in the commit message. > > My view is that changes that silence compiler warnings are > not fixing bugs and that these changes should generally not > be backported. > > Compiler silencing changes marked as fixes can introduce other > defects in working code. > > Backporting patches to stable trees should be conservatively > rather than liberally applied. > > It seems that the actual backport maintainers disagree though. But the rule seemed to be "bug fixing patches must contain a Fixes", and not "backportable patches must contain a Fixes". Overall, the relationship between backporting and Fixes is not so clear. Patches that remove something unnecessary might benefit from having a Fixes, but might not be worth backporting. julia From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Julia Lawall Date: Thu, 04 Jun 2020 16:29:16 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH] pinctrl: pxa: pxa2xx: Remove 'pxa2xx_pinctrl_exit()' which is unused and broken Message-Id: List-Id: References: <20200601183102.GS30374@kadam> <20200604083120.GF22511@kadam> <2aa49a543e6f48a6f428a37b63a06f9149870225.camel@perches.com> <32232229031e02edcc268b1074c9bac44012ee35.camel@perches.com> <10e54ee84bd44171ef329bed9e7e6a946bae61ba.camel@perches.com> <20200604123038.GG22511@kadam> <0749ac5e3868c6ba50728ced8366bfd86b0b8500.camel@perches.com> In-Reply-To: <0749ac5e3868c6ba50728ced8366bfd86b0b8500.camel@perches.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Joe Perches Cc: Linux ARM , Linus Walleij , kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Haojian Zhuang , Julia Lawall , "open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" , Christophe JAILLET , Dan Carpenter , Robert Jarzmik , Daniel Mack On Thu, 4 Jun 2020, Joe Perches wrote: > On Thu, 2020-06-04 at 15:30 +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 04, 2020 at 01:42:12PM +0200, Julia Lawall wrote: > > > OK, I recall a discussion with Dan where he suggested that some things > > > that were not actually bug fixes could also merit a Fixes tag. But it's > > > probably better if he weighs in directly. > > > > I generally think Fixes should only be used for "real bug" fixes. > > > > The one exception is when I'm reviewing a patch that fixes an "unused > > assignment" static checker warning is that I know which commit > > introduced the warning. I don't have strong feelings if it's in the > > Fixes tag or if it's just mentioned in the commit message. > > My view is that changes that silence compiler warnings are > not fixing bugs and that these changes should generally not > be backported. > > Compiler silencing changes marked as fixes can introduce other > defects in working code. > > Backporting patches to stable trees should be conservatively > rather than liberally applied. > > It seems that the actual backport maintainers disagree though. But the rule seemed to be "bug fixing patches must contain a Fixes", and not "backportable patches must contain a Fixes". Overall, the relationship between backporting and Fixes is not so clear. Patches that remove something unnecessary might benefit from having a Fixes, but might not be worth backporting. julia From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8010DC433DF for ; Thu, 4 Jun 2020 16:29:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4D150206DC for ; Thu, 4 Jun 2020 16:29:38 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="Dvy0RVLG" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 4D150206DC Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=inria.fr Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20170209; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post: List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:MIME-Version:References:Message-ID: In-Reply-To:Subject:To:From:Date:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: List-Owner; bh=taSzd9HBW0cNnmi8QpHIlMH6s6obRxxQ9qQ7AqmM2hk=; b=Dvy0RVLGKiNEUd 1pKejrjhlf0fsLeB3tc3ySg6ihnI2GN8SL2THfmqP65Te1iN/oaMC1TZHFp5St7ykDoQ19lVLAcSC puuiTIIRjFqeDrG63AGIPCy09RhRpsnEGjxCiXLIvgfKZzannSoXWSnFD6wQH458UDch6x/szDBm4 bga0R+c+h9x/LVy1n8Zc5hGQHQeY5mjX+YyL+9jAUrLrJmoNGGV/TPlYZqs4zMTAdXzu/RaKobnm4 4k9BOeag4eXdeqwCstXnlAbkkXh2lvPx8Bkq2Qe4ecVhV2aBdynd9O2Fu8GaBYlc0k7+Ou3mN6eUe AevJb0YeU5KyMLN1a0GA==; Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1jgsk9-000884-Rn; Thu, 04 Jun 2020 16:29:25 +0000 Received: from mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr ([192.134.164.104]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1jgsk6-00087D-O3 for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Thu, 04 Jun 2020 16:29:24 +0000 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.73,472,1583190000"; d="scan'208";a="350610914" Received: from abo-173-121-68.mrs.modulonet.fr (HELO hadrien) ([85.68.121.173]) by mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 04 Jun 2020 18:29:17 +0200 Date: Thu, 4 Jun 2020 18:29:16 +0200 (CEST) From: Julia Lawall X-X-Sender: jll@hadrien To: Joe Perches Subject: Re: [PATCH] pinctrl: pxa: pxa2xx: Remove 'pxa2xx_pinctrl_exit()' which is unused and broken In-Reply-To: <0749ac5e3868c6ba50728ced8366bfd86b0b8500.camel@perches.com> Message-ID: References: <20200601183102.GS30374@kadam> <20200604083120.GF22511@kadam> <2aa49a543e6f48a6f428a37b63a06f9149870225.camel@perches.com> <32232229031e02edcc268b1074c9bac44012ee35.camel@perches.com> <10e54ee84bd44171ef329bed9e7e6a946bae61ba.camel@perches.com> <20200604123038.GG22511@kadam> <0749ac5e3868c6ba50728ced8366bfd86b0b8500.camel@perches.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.21 (DEB 202 2017-01-01) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20200604_092923_081363_9BF05F7C X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 14.11 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Linux ARM , Linus Walleij , kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Haojian Zhuang , Julia Lawall , "open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" , Christophe JAILLET , Dan Carpenter , Robert Jarzmik , Daniel Mack Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Thu, 4 Jun 2020, Joe Perches wrote: > On Thu, 2020-06-04 at 15:30 +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 04, 2020 at 01:42:12PM +0200, Julia Lawall wrote: > > > OK, I recall a discussion with Dan where he suggested that some things > > > that were not actually bug fixes could also merit a Fixes tag. But it's > > > probably better if he weighs in directly. > > > > I generally think Fixes should only be used for "real bug" fixes. > > > > The one exception is when I'm reviewing a patch that fixes an "unused > > assignment" static checker warning is that I know which commit > > introduced the warning. I don't have strong feelings if it's in the > > Fixes tag or if it's just mentioned in the commit message. > > My view is that changes that silence compiler warnings are > not fixing bugs and that these changes should generally not > be backported. > > Compiler silencing changes marked as fixes can introduce other > defects in working code. > > Backporting patches to stable trees should be conservatively > rather than liberally applied. > > It seems that the actual backport maintainers disagree though. But the rule seemed to be "bug fixing patches must contain a Fixes", and not "backportable patches must contain a Fixes". Overall, the relationship between backporting and Fixes is not so clear. Patches that remove something unnecessary might benefit from having a Fixes, but might not be worth backporting. julia _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel