On 13.12.24 17:24, Jonathan Corbet wrote: > Thorsten Leemhuis <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > [...] >> diff --git a/Documentation/process/6.Followthrough.rst b/Documentation/process/6.Followthrough.rst >> index 763a80d21240f0..2ba16a71aba9b4 100644 >> --- a/Documentation/process/6.Followthrough.rst >> +++ b/Documentation/process/6.Followthrough.rst >> @@ -234,6 +234,22 @@ On procedure: >> requests again should ideally come directly from maintainers or happen in >> accordance with them. > [...] >> + - Did the culprit make it into a proper mainline release during the past >> + twelve months? Or is it a recent mainline commit backported to stable or >> + longterm releases in the past few weeks? Then you are kindly asked to ensure >> + stable inclusion as described by Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst. >> + Usually you want to realized thos by adding a "Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" to > > Something went a bit astray in that sentence. "you want to do this" ? Uhhps, yeah, went with 'Many developers realize this by adding a "Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" to the patch description.'. That also leaves... >> + the patch description. Note, a "Fixes:" tag alone does not guarantee a >> + backport, as the stable team does not pick up all such changes and might >> + silently drop them in case trouble arises. > > In the past we have had subsystem maintainers who didn't want people to > put CC: stable tags into their own patches; not sure if that's still the case? ...it somewhat open for such subsystems, if there still are any. Ciao, Thorsten
