From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from bedivere.hansenpartnership.com (bedivere.hansenpartnership.com [96.44.175.130]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 85E7A2F9B for ; Wed, 21 Apr 2021 18:35:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by bedivere.hansenpartnership.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 029611280AFA for ; Wed, 21 Apr 2021 11:35:37 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=hansenpartnership.com; s=20151216; t=1619030137; bh=5HQ/nlcVEZow9s+NvZMvP5sxM8LllGslqBIC/CAVH1M=; h=Message-ID:Subject:From:To:Date:From; b=M2M1MQNVeoSl9phiV8W8bd81d2iNHJJu/G+6/OpvQjsrkTV7cz4xCrAEQsjvEY7RH gYKAIYPlGvkhlQ2sCgvPw/ShcKELDYyr6FiDHxSA7zKDQ3SfELFsAQulM2fXhfn/55 NCuHHdeQg5yTbG2/k3WkGyL9ZGy7RG9Tpyg58y3k= Received: from bedivere.hansenpartnership.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (bedivere.hansenpartnership.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 72Moaw1CiQXu for ; Wed, 21 Apr 2021 11:35:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from jarvis.int.hansenpartnership.com (unknown [IPv6:2601:600:8280:66d1::527]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by bedivere.hansenpartnership.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B4DF41280AF7 for ; Wed, 21 Apr 2021 11:35:36 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=hansenpartnership.com; s=20151216; t=1619030136; bh=5HQ/nlcVEZow9s+NvZMvP5sxM8LllGslqBIC/CAVH1M=; h=Message-ID:Subject:From:To:Date:From; b=i1tfvTSmpLZjgUPxhD0NZ+W0HyLGRI2+vdo4RcW8Yh+XY2odrpJXcVmJlGhR5tOiE YcABfyiN/3ZCjElzahwoFi9OnisHoAR8Qey40OFXcITE0BEXJFmABlubLuQRy4cSXB SuXwyTlo2S9+tdSC2RU/vX8ZoJjaa5QUtMF7GYlU= Message-ID: Subject: [MAINTAINER SUMMIT] Rethinking the acceptance policy for "trivial" patches From: James Bottomley To: ksummit@lists.linux.dev Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2021 11:35:36 -0700 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" User-Agent: Evolution 3.34.4 X-Mailing-List: ksummit@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I've long been on record as not really being a fan of trivial patches because they can cause merge issues with current patches and introduce bugs, particularly in older drivers, that don't get detected for a long while. However, the recent events with the University of Minnesota: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20210421130105.1226686-1-gregkh@linuxfoundation.org/ Have elevated the risk factor around trivial patches claiming to fix bugs to the point where it looks like there's no such thing as a truly trivial patch and they all need reviewing. Our policy in SCSI for a long time has been no trivial patches accepted to maintained drivers, and I think that would be a good start if adopted kernel wide, but I think the next policy should be no trivial bug fix without a pointer to the actual bug report or report from a trusted static checker. This would likely mean we have to create a list of trusted static checkers ... obviously 0day and coverity but what else? James