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=-2.5 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=ham 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 20A7CECDE4B for ; Thu, 8 Nov 2018 20:05:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D8C262081C for ; Thu, 8 Nov 2018 20:05:20 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org D8C262081C Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.ibm.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727164AbeKIFmU (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Nov 2018 00:42:20 -0500 Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.158.5]:39848 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725199AbeKIFmU (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Nov 2018 00:42:20 -0500 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098421.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.22/8.16.0.22) with SMTP id wA8JsTlw116002 for ; Thu, 8 Nov 2018 15:05:17 -0500 Received: from e12.ny.us.ibm.com (e12.ny.us.ibm.com [129.33.205.202]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2nmrq9gkdk-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Thu, 08 Nov 2018 15:05:17 -0500 Received: from localhost by e12.ny.us.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Thu, 8 Nov 2018 20:05:16 -0000 Received: from b01cxnp23032.gho.pok.ibm.com (9.57.198.27) by e12.ny.us.ibm.com (146.89.104.199) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256/256) Thu, 8 Nov 2018 20:05:10 -0000 Received: from b01ledav003.gho.pok.ibm.com (b01ledav003.gho.pok.ibm.com [9.57.199.108]) by b01cxnp23032.gho.pok.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id wA8K59mS27721832 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Thu, 8 Nov 2018 20:05:09 GMT Received: from b01ledav003.gho.pok.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1441BB2067; Thu, 8 Nov 2018 20:05:09 +0000 (GMT) Received: from b01ledav003.gho.pok.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id CFBFBB205F; Thu, 8 Nov 2018 20:05:08 +0000 (GMT) Received: from paulmck-ThinkPad-W541 (unknown [9.85.215.156]) by b01ledav003.gho.pok.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Thu, 8 Nov 2018 20:05:08 +0000 (GMT) Received: by paulmck-ThinkPad-W541 (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 8BBE216C341E; Thu, 8 Nov 2018 12:05:08 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2018 12:05:08 -0800 From: "Paul E. McKenney" To: Thomas Gleixner Cc: Dan Williams , Peter Zijlstra , Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Mailing List , X86 ML , John Stultz , acme@redhat.com, frederic@kernel.org, Jonathan Corbet , Andy Lutomirski , Marc Zyngier , Daniel Lezcano , Dave Hansen , Ard Biesheuvel , Will Deacon , Mark Brown , Greg KH Subject: Re: [patch 2/2] Documentation/process: Add tip tree handbook Reply-To: paulmck@linux.ibm.com References: <20181107171010.421878737@linutronix.de> <20181107171149.165693799@linutronix.de> <20181108074012.GD20032@gmail.com> <20181108091251.GL9761@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20181108174006.GP4170@linux.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 x-cbid: 18110820-0060-0000-0000-000002CFB2D8 X-IBM-SpamModules-Scores: X-IBM-SpamModules-Versions: BY=3.00010009; HX=3.00000242; KW=3.00000007; PH=3.00000004; SC=3.00000269; SDB=6.01114590; UDB=6.00577875; IPR=6.00894689; MB=3.00024077; MTD=3.00000008; XFM=3.00000015; UTC=2018-11-08 20:05:14 X-IBM-AV-DETECTION: SAVI=unused REMOTE=unused XFE=unused x-cbparentid: 18110820-0061-0000-0000-000047225211 Message-Id: <20181108200508.GB4170@linux.ibm.com> X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:,, definitions=2018-11-08_11:,, signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1807170000 definitions=main-1811080169 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Nov 08, 2018 at 08:58:32PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Thu, 8 Nov 2018, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 08, 2018 at 09:19:33AM -0800, Dan Williams wrote: > > > On Thu, Nov 8, 2018 at 1:13 AM Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 08, 2018 at 08:40:12AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > > > + - Cc: ``cc-ed-person `` > > > > > > + > > > > > > + If the patch should be backported to stable, then please add a '``Cc: > > > > > > + stable@vger.kernel.org``' tag, but do not Cc stable when sending your > > > > > > + mail. > > > > > > > > > > Can I suggest a more canonical form: > > > > > > > > > > Cc: # v4.18 and later kernels > > > > > > > > > > It would be nice if people adding Cc: stable lines would actually try to > > > > > figure out which exact kernel versions are affected. > > > > > > I know at least StGit mail does not grok that "#"notation. I've > > > stopped using it in favor of a "Fixes:" tag. I would think "Fixes:" is > > > preferred over "# " if only because it can be used to track > > > fixes to commits that have been backported to stable. Is there any > > > reason for "# " to continue in a world where we have "Fixes:"? > > > > I sometimes have fixes that need to be different for different past > > releases. And there have been cases where RCU patches would apply and > > build cleanly against releases for which it was not appropriate, but > > would have some low-probability failure. Which meant that it could be > > expected to pass light testing. :-/ > > > > So I sometimes need a way of saying which versions a given patch applies > > to, independent of the version into which the bug was introduced. > > I can understand that you want to limit the scope of automatic backports. > > But we really should try to always use of the Fixes: tag. In most cases the > SHA1 of the commit in the fixes tag defines the backport scope. > > For the rare cases where the buggy commit is really old, but you want to > limit the backport scope for a reason then I really like to avoid to > overload the Cc stable tag and have a dedicated tag instead. Something > like: > > Fixes: 1234567890AB ("subsys/comp: Short summary") > Backport-to: 4.14 > > and have that backport tag right under the Fixes tag. If the Backport-to > tag is ommitted, the SHA1 defines the scope, but I'm fine with making it > mandatory. > > If there is really the special RCU case where each and every stable version > needs some special treatment then say: > > Backport-to: Manual > > or whatever sensible word would express it correctly. > > The Fixes tag is really valuable when you need to make connections and I > know that the people who are looking into safety-critical Linux value the > tag because it can be used for tracking and for metrics. Indeed, I do need to get my act together with the Fixes tag. And I am happy with whatever format would limit backports appropriately. Thanx, Paul