From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1762227AbdEWNBi (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 May 2017 09:01:38 -0400 Received: from mail-lf0-f66.google.com ([209.85.215.66]:35666 "EHLO mail-lf0-f66.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757999AbdEWNBe (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 May 2017 09:01:34 -0400 Date: Tue, 23 May 2017 15:01:29 +0200 From: Daniel Vetter To: Dan Carpenter Cc: Jani Nikula , kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, Colin King Subject: Re: [PATCH][drm-next] drm/pl111: make structure pl111_display_funcs static Message-ID: <20170523130129.fjiiyogouehq6e4t@phenom.ffwll.local> Mail-Followup-To: Dan Carpenter , Jani Nikula , kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, Colin King References: <20170519110203.19417-1-colin.king@canonical.com> <874lwhoxyk.fsf@intel.com> <20170519194759.gfiefx6xwrnrjn3x@mwanda> <874lwg8v9n.fsf@eliezer.anholt.net> <20170519201641.fwnoakx5gew7wo5t@mwanda> <871srgouhd.fsf@intel.com> <20170523083122.5xgb5vuy3sdvjlbp@mwanda> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170523083122.5xgb5vuy3sdvjlbp@mwanda> X-Operating-System: Linux phenom 4.9.0-2-amd64 User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170306 (1.8.0) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 11:31:22AM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 11:19:58AM +0300, Jani Nikula wrote: > > On Fri, 19 May 2017, Dan Carpenter wrote: > > > On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 01:08:20PM -0700, Eric Anholt wrote: > > >> OK, that's definitely not how I've read the > > >> Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst description of the Fixes > > >> tag, which talks about bugs found with git bisect and things that should > > >> go to -stable. I would not have considered what this patch is changing > > >> to be a bug. > > > > > > True. I don't consider this a bug either. I wouldn't have included a > > > Fixes tag. > > > > > > I pretty much agree with the submitting-patches.rst except it should > > > probably say to include it on more stuff. Fixes: tags are required for > > > all bugfixes to netdev for example. > > > > We use Fixes: in drm/i915 to basically indicate that the referenced > > commit has a bug that actually needs to be fixed, this patch is the fix, > > and should go wherever the referenced commit goes. Annotating typo fixes > > and missing static keywords and such is just noise from *our* POV, and > > need to be filtered out. > > Yes, yes. I agree. Fixes should fix a bug. I'm sorry, I didn't read > the original patch carefully, I just saw that people said Fixes meant > backporting to -stable. Yeah we use Fixes: a lot, also to help all our product teams, who have all varying versions of frankenstein kernels. If they cherry-pick some feature from upstream, they need to know which bugfixes to backport. cc: stable is orthogonal to Fixes:, but Fixes should imo indicate a real bugfix (i.e. if you have the first patch, you want all the patches with Fixes: lines referencing that patch). Unfortunately on the mobile/gfx side there's very few customers who just use a stable release, so we need to be rather dutiful with sprinkling Fixes: tags over everything that fixes bugs (but not more, otherwise there's screaming about backporting too much). -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch