On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 09:18:15AM +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> FYI: you shouldn't cc stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx directly on your patches,
> or add the cc: line. Only patches that are already in Linus' tree
> should be sent there.
Not true at all, please read:
https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/stable-kernel-rules.html
for how to do this properly. Please do not spread incorrect
information.
And Jason did this properly, he put cc: stable@ in the s-o-b area and
all is good, I will pick up this patch once it hits Linus's tree.
And there is no problem actually sending the patch to stable@vger while
under development like this, as it gives me a heads-up that something is
coming, and is trivial to filter out.
If you really want to be nice, you can just do:
cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxx
which goes to /dev/null on kernel.org, so no email will be sent to any
list, but my scripts still pick it up. But no real need to do that,
it's fine.
> Also, the fixes tags are really quite sufficient.
No it is not, I have had to dig out patches more and more because people
do NOT put the cc: stable and only put Fixes:, which is not a good thing
as I then have to "guess" what the maintainer/developer ment.
Be explicit if you know it, cc: stable please.
> In fact, it is
> actually rather difficult these days to prevent something from being
> taken into -stable if the bots notice that it applies cleanly.
Those "bots" are still driven by a lot of human work, please make it
easy on us whenever possible.
thanks,
greg k-h
