[/me saw this by chance]
On 19.09.23 18:00, Johan Hovold wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 05:40:18PM +0200, Johan Hovold wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 11:09:54AM -0400, Sasha Levin wrote:
>>> On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 03:28:24PM +0200, Johan Hovold wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 09:06:54AM -0400, Sasha Levin wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 08:15:04AM +0200, Johan Hovold wrote:
>
> You also seem to have made up new stable kernel rules
No, it was me who changed the text, as I saw people struggling with it
and noticed that's partly due to problems in the text. But just like
with code changes there's always a risk that slight changes to a text
result in unwanted effects. Not yet sure if that's the case here.
> as adding device
> tree nodes clearly doesn't fit the description in
> stable-kernel-rules.rst:
>
> It must either fix a real bug that bothers people or just add a
> device ID.
>
> (This used to say "New device IDs and quirks are also accepted.")
The "device IDs" part is still there (you quoted it); and a quirk is a
"real bug that bothers people", that's why it's mentioned a bit less
prominently now and just as a example (to quote a bit more from the
text: "It must either fix a real bug that bothers people or just add a
device ID. To elaborate on the former:
It fixes a problem like an oops, a hang, data corruption, a real
security issue, a hardware quirk, [...]")
Make me wonder: why do you think "device tree nodes" were covered
before, but not anymore? What do you think should be changed to cover
them again?
Ciao, Thorsten
