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=-2.6 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no 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 778D3C38A29 for ; Tue, 14 Apr 2020 15:18:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C5302076B for ; Tue, 14 Apr 2020 15:18:00 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1586877480; bh=Wa+qi2HBtbHbWYPnlD8RTn32LkOHAV3tmDpVnkMjakc=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-ID:From; b=Izg6WJsrmjLOfJc1xaH1qVkiIXN6BVk5Zm3DzMCxvgc+pdqOow1d/76rVJ3vktb5J 6VjrIbJFsJ//o8hl2iDJisGlJeZlWX3/JY9e73AepEPQM28SA75oSWncrhdPu97MJo Q6wqxu1qLZb1tViG+zlPuTNNT1G0FS4lBTIFf5Oc= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2407288AbgDNPR4 (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Apr 2020 11:17:56 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:60410 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2407290AbgDNPQs (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Apr 2020 11:16:48 -0400 Received: from localhost (c-73-47-72-35.hsd1.nh.comcast.net [73.47.72.35]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3AFB320768; Tue, 14 Apr 2020 15:16:46 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1586877406; bh=Wa+qi2HBtbHbWYPnlD8RTn32LkOHAV3tmDpVnkMjakc=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=emyUmr8na6VFJUPLNhRR3Dj6AeHqvcYx6yYPT746QFcZxfdZ3wLRHfjiCUcYbwBof olj5yXea3GtoJQb7k6rsKItCtYbIantaO8IuNDsR/3LR89Bpllo1e2lSA9UNyYmUTu +l7dDBjilttQt8kFpvjbefklJJtKJZTBDolkdQlk= Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2020 11:16:45 -0400 From: Sasha Levin To: Or Gerlitz Cc: Greg KH , Jakub Kicinski , Stable , Linux Netdev List , Saeed Mahameed , David Miller Subject: Re: [PATCH AUTOSEL 4.9 09/26] net/mlx5e: Init ethtool steering for representors Message-ID: <20200414151645.GE1068@sasha-vm> References: <20200411231413.26911-1-sashal@kernel.org> <20200411231413.26911-9-sashal@kernel.org> <20200412105935.49dacbf7@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com> <20200414015627.GA1068@sasha-vm> <20200414110911.GA341846@kroah.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 05:38:32PM +0300, Or Gerlitz wrote: >On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 2:09 PM Greg KH wrote: >> On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 01:22:59PM +0300, Or Gerlitz wrote: >> > IMHO - I think it should be the other way around, you should get approval >> > from sub-system maintainers to put their code in charge into auto-selection, >> > unless there's kernel summit decision that says otherwise, is this documented >> > anywhere? >> >> No, we can't get make this a "only take if I agree" as there are _many_ >> subsystem maintainers who today never mark anything for stable trees, as >> they just can't be bothered. And that's fine, stable trees should not >> take up any extra maintainer time if they do not want to do so. So it's >> simpler to do an opt-out when asked for. > >OK, but I must say I am worried from the comment made here: > >"I'm not sure what a fixes tag has to do with inclusion in a stable tree" > >This patch > >(A) was pushed to -next and not -rc kernel Fixes can (and should) come in during a merge window as well. They are not put on hold until the -rc releases. >(B) doesn't have fixes tag In the 4.19 stable tree there are 3962 commits explicitly tagged for stable, only 2382 of them have a fixes tag. >(C) the change log state clearly that what's being "fixed" >can't be reproduced on any earlier kernel [..] "only possible >to reproduce with next commit in this series" > >but it was selected for -stable -- at least if the fixes tag was used >as gating criteria, this wrong stable inclusion could have been eliminated Are you suggesting that a commit without a fixes tag is never a fix? -- Thanks, Sasha