Hi! > > So to summarize, that buggy commit was backported even though: > > > > * There were no indications that it was a bug fix (and thus potentially > > suitable for stable) in the first place. > > * On the AUTOSEL thread, someone told you the commit is broken. > > * There was already a thread that reported a regression caused by the commit. > > Easily findable via lore search. > > * There was also already a pending patch that Fixes the commit. Again easily > > findable via lore search. > > > > So it seems a *lot* of things went wrong, no? Why? If so many things can go > > wrong, it's not just a "mistake" but rather the process is the problem... > > BTW, another cause of this is that the commit (66f99628eb24) was AUTOSEL'd after > only being in mainline for 4 days, and *released* in all LTS kernels after only > being in mainline for 12 days. Surely that's a timeline befitting a critical > security vulnerability, not some random neural-network-selected commit that > wasn't even fixing anything? I see this problem, too, "-stable" is more experimental than Linus's releases. I believe that -stable would be more useful without AUTOSEL process. Best regards, Pavel -- People of Russia, stop Putin before his war on Ukraine escalates.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
