Re: [PATCH v4 1/1] block: bugfix for Amiga partition overflow check patch

[Michael Schmitz <schmitzmic@gmail.com>]

Hi Jens,

On 6/07/23 09:44, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 7/5/23 3:41?PM, Michael Schmitz wrote:
>> Hi Jens,
>>
>> On 6/07/23 08:42, Jens Axboe wrote:
>>> On 7/4/23 5:38?PM, Michael Schmitz wrote:
>>>> Reported-by: Christian Zigotzky <chzigotzky@xenosoft.de>
>>>> Fixes: b6f3f28f60 ("block: add overflow checks for Amiga partition support")
>>>> Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 5.2
>>> This is confusing - it's being marked for stable, but also labeled as
>>> fixing a commit that isn't even a release yet?
>> True - but as you had pointed out, the commit this fixes is set in
>> stone. How do we ensure this bugfix is picked up as well when the
>> other patches are backported? Does that  happen automatically, or do I
>> need to add a Link: tag to the patch being fixed?
> This:
>
> Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 5.2
>
> should be enough for it to go into stable from 5.2 and onwards.
OK - I wasn't certain whether you wanted the Fixes or stable tag dropped.
>> (Greg didn't seem to object to the Fixes: as such, just to the
>> incorrect version prereq)
> I think it's really confusing... A patch should only have a Fixes tag if
> it's fixing a specific bug in that patch. Either it is, in which case
> you would not need Cc stable at all since it's only in 6.5-rc, or it
It is fixing a bug in b6f3f28f60. I should have checked whether the 
patch series had already gone to release, not just -rc, instead of just 
adding the stable tag out of caution.
> isn't and you should just have the stable tag with 5.2+ as you already
> have.
>
> I'll apply this and remove the Fixes line, and the message id thing
> too.

Thanks - whatever is least confusing is fine, as long as it's backported 
to stable in the end.

Won't be sending v5 then...

Cheers,

     Michael