From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751945AbdBCSey (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Feb 2017 13:34:54 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:39530 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751366AbdBCSev (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Feb 2017 13:34:51 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH] IB/cma: Fix reversed test To: Dan Carpenter References: <20170127131535.19918-1-christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr> <1485552696.13218.0.camel@sandisk.com> <1485561952.2432.31.camel@redhat.com> <20170128065927.GP4149@mwanda> Cc: Bart Van Assche , "christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr" , "hal.rosenstock@gmail.com" , "sean.hefty@intel.com" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org" , "kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org" From: Doug Ledford Message-ID: <2fde1e87-a345-4697-e205-051a3973e624@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2017 13:34:28 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20170128065927.GP4149@mwanda> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="6kp3EIebxmjj3o6Qdlj4odw2MUCgFt8eS" X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.29]); Fri, 03 Feb 2017 18:34:47 +0000 (UTC) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --6kp3EIebxmjj3o6Qdlj4odw2MUCgFt8eS Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="NQuh6BplNUcD1UwrU4AIsqLPf3goCEq7M"; protected-headers="v1" From: Doug Ledford To: Dan Carpenter Cc: Bart Van Assche , "christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr" , "hal.rosenstock@gmail.com" , "sean.hefty@intel.com" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org" , "kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org" Message-ID: <2fde1e87-a345-4697-e205-051a3973e624@redhat.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH] IB/cma: Fix reversed test References: <20170127131535.19918-1-christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr> <1485552696.13218.0.camel@sandisk.com> <1485561952.2432.31.camel@redhat.com> <20170128065927.GP4149@mwanda> In-Reply-To: <20170128065927.GP4149@mwanda> --NQuh6BplNUcD1UwrU4AIsqLPf3goCEq7M Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 1/28/2017 1:59 AM, Dan Carpenter wrote: > On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 07:05:52PM -0500, Doug Ledford wrote: >>> Do you think this patch needs "Fixes:" and "Cc: stable" tags? >> >> It does not. >=20 > We always should have fixes tags. >=20 > When I'm reviewing, I try to look up the patch which introduced the bug= > so I can figure out what the intent was. Having a Fixes tag speeds up > my work. >=20 > Looking at how the bug was introduced sometimes helps to prevent bugs > from recurring in the future. For example, I've seen several bugs > introduced because the right people weren't on the CC to review it. Fo= r > this particular bug it feels like probably this bug could have been > detected with more testing. I doubt it would have made it into a > released kernel. >=20 > Also it let's you CC the original authors and hopefully they can Ack it= =2E OK, in my mind, there is a specific reason for Fixes: tags, and it relates to the automated means by which other maintainers pull patches for long term stable trees. Because both the buggy patch and this fix are being queued in the same general kernel release, there is no need for this patch to get automatically pulled for any of the long term stable kernels. Hence my statement that it doesn't need a fixes tag. I don't disagree with your reasons for wanting one, but even if you added the fixes tag, the Cc: stable is definitely not needed. --=20 Doug Ledford GPG Key ID: B826A3330E572FDD Key fingerprint =3D AE6B 1BDA 122B 23B4 265B 1274 B826 A333 0E57 2FD= D --NQuh6BplNUcD1UwrU4AIsqLPf3goCEq7M-- --6kp3EIebxmjj3o6Qdlj4odw2MUCgFt8eS Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJYlM00AAoJELgmozMOVy/d0N0P/35uKixWGcTgjO48Vhcsn/ea s7G0ZzCVkRtMNYlZ3oLzOB6ymWJgba1VDN6VUqk7cp0/x0ehWBGleUTHMC1rIRTv Y5Cmr1UHi5Nk21TYkGWgclVEJ+wk5MoRX5iS8XR9Q2yhogoUtkCBzCvIPBge/8aA aF/axkbQ/G00kvAiD5pHeVyNLMzdBHFmkGSPzMt/XZOKXsSARzD8cwApe+7hp/H6 7KI2dV86kH/BhCfk7GGOi3k1L12uQNZJwOtX0UktzgOYq38pzbiD18ARzOxbBiZ9 9iNVACiOfAra/6/yUtDjVHZ0owS5WVksO9rC59nl+9QKV4chLz+IiaZre3d7EK4F 9iuAXd8A7sn2mFpH469o5Fp4n1jwqiGIamLJX/3HP0D42ME2+pztCbqWX85KQ/Lh /ImyIws+ke5+SqzsA3uHoi3rfIRToIPb2FuLrUZHhAeCLE4H87uoN27GVbLlYr2W qZ3w95aMoqiGxxe6dNyiHxlNLiGBYDU76cZTWTYrj6H7W7mg4cg4e2P/vuqe0L86 UYr4XgOJwItp6q7ppsJUeVRR5jmt9rvSRaIgdXUnTNxRHGuKan6NX20LI/7UrIlz E+ryNrk1SFExdGeFiHqeyZRVJcOGDZze1kTUil25pfHBnnEnPOOFrvp/INJZS+s5 4EKjAg4ZMJ4ojNuH6Vl2 =RJHR -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --6kp3EIebxmjj3o6Qdlj4odw2MUCgFt8eS--