On Tue, Feb 13, 2024 at 12:59:52PM +0000, Will Deacon wrote: > > The typical kernel standard is to fix bugs in patches and only reach > > for a wholesale revert if the community is struggling with bug > > fixing. Dmitry already tested removing that hunk, Robin explained the > > issue, we understand the bug fix is to remove the > > arm_smmu_init_domain_context() call. Nothing justifies a full scale > > revert. > > I can't say I'm aware of any consensus for how to handle this, to be > completely honest with you. Well, I work in a lot of subsystems and this is a surprise to me and not something I've seen before. Fix the bug, move forward. Reverts are a cultural admission of failure. I use threats of a revert as a hammer to encourage people to pay attention to the bugs. I hardly ever actually revert things. What does reverting their code say to my submitters??? > > I'll send another patch if you want, but it seems like a waste of all > > our time. > > It's a bug fix, of course it's a waste of time! We're talking minutes > though, right? It becomes hard for maintainers to juggle the tress since you have to send the revert to -rc and the fix on top of the rc to next. Again, I will send the patch, just discussing. Jason
