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=-5.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS 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 82425C433EF for ; Fri, 17 Sep 2021 19:29:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5EF666124B for ; Fri, 17 Sep 2021 19:29:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S235875AbhIQTa5 (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 Sep 2021 15:30:57 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:49108 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1343584AbhIQTa5 (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 Sep 2021 15:30:57 -0400 Received: from galois.linutronix.de (Galois.linutronix.de [IPv6:2a0a:51c0:0:12e:550::1]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D22C0C061574; Fri, 17 Sep 2021 12:29:34 -0700 (PDT) From: Thomas Gleixner DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020; t=1631906973; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=ZJyonWjUJqp33h5nUgUsFw+D5tDs8cR6dvgzEeDcL8A=; b=RKPsuqMQecuWhWbWS0nseNBvi3nfvJ6orZIaLFbV9JMftA/RQGbp9Y5D7TxazENjyuCUrD +5bNvwis2vYKNVPwCgHJfgDJykf5f2GzSDEy+BZIz0s2bC5DhMg3/Osrna323YWfEl51fq 2l94kSeP/aKzJE0maWDk0TQSpy+H67xBGkynB+RmlYOFtDkHygzBvtrnjTFfMo9FHXXKy5 cpz57nyLnw/eLhcYoh5noy0i9IGGgNWAbiabhFXykdJSuv9sNIsYRbgPIFGEG6viHpkjT1 DQJHChTvNCNyNbsEp5ahh1l+jc6TceyvVIlkFb1ji4wBtwPL6kQOBtR1WeCl6w== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020e; t=1631906973; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=ZJyonWjUJqp33h5nUgUsFw+D5tDs8cR6dvgzEeDcL8A=; b=T/p89ji9mfa/f6OBteH0r5U1TKp7p4cPaHOUqxVU/JhamWd4Vb44QnICgTv1Rwgk8EmkvZ ljKF/+aGf434rMDw== To: Greg Kroah-Hartman Cc: Arnd Bergmann , Linux Kernel Mailing List , "# 3.4.x" , Lukas Hannen Subject: Re: [PATCH 5.14 298/334] time: Handle negative seconds correctly in timespec64_to_ns() In-Reply-To: References: <20210913131113.390368911@linuxfoundation.org> <20210913131123.500712780@linuxfoundation.org> <874kak9moe.ffs@tglx> <87sfy38p1o.ffs@tglx> Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2021 21:29:32 +0200 Message-ID: <87ee9n80gz.ffs@tglx> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: stable@vger.kernel.org Greg, On Fri, Sep 17 2021 at 17:20, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Fri, Sep 17, 2021 at 12:38:43PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: >> Nah. I try to pay more attention. I'm not against AUTOSEL per se, but >> could we change the rules slightly? >> >> Any change which is selected by AUTOSEL and lacks a Cc: stable@... is >> put on hold until acked by the maintainer unless it is a prerequisite >> for applying a stable tagged fix? >> >> This can be default off and made effective on maintainer request. >> >> Hmm? > > The whole point of the AUTOSEL patches are for the huge numbers of > subsystems where maintainers and developers do not care about the stable > trees at all, and so they do not mark patches to be backported. So > requireing an opt-in like this would defeat the purpose. > > We do allow the ability to take files/subsystems out of the AUTOSEL > process as there are many maintainers that do do this right and get > annoyed when patches are picked that they feel shouldn't have. That's > the best thing we can do for stuff like this. I guess I was not able to express myself correctly. What I wanted to say is: 1) Default is AUTOSEL 2) Maintainer can take files/subsystems out of AUTOSEL completely Exists today 3) Maintainer allows AUTOSEL, but anything picked from files/subsystems without a stable tag requires an explicit ACK from the maintainer for the backport. Is new and I would be the first to opt-in :) My rationale for #3 is that even when being careful about stable tags, it happens that one is missing. Occasionaly AUTOSEL finds one of those in my subsystems which I appreciate. Does that make more sense now? Thanks, tglx