> On Sep 12, 2024, at 3:11 PM, Benjamin Coddington <bcodding@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 12 Sep 2024, at 14:17, Chuck Lever III wrote: > >>> On Sep 12, 2024, at 11:06 AM, Benjamin Coddington <bcodding@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> >>> On 12 Sep 2024, at 10:01, Chuck Lever III wrote: >>> >>>> For the NFSD and exportfs hunks: >>>> >>>> Acked-by: Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@xxxxxxxxxx <mailto:chuck.lever@xxxxxxxxxx>> >>>> >>>> "lockd: introduce safe async lock op" is in v6.10. Does this >>>> series need to be backported to v6.10.y ? Should the series >>>> have "Fixes: 2dd10de8e6bc ("lockd: introduce safe async lock >>>> op")" ? >>> >>> Thanks Chuck! Probably yes, if we want notifications fixed up there. It >>> should be sufficient to add this to the signoff area for at least the first >>> three (and fourth for cleanup): >>> >>> Cc: <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> # 6.10.x >> >> 2dd10de8e6bc landed in v6.7. >> >> I suppose that since v6.10.y is likely to be closed by >> the time this series is applied upstream, this tag might >> be confusing. >> >> Thus Fixes: 2dd10de8e6bc and a plain Cc: stable should >> work best. Then whichever stable kernel is open when your >> fixes are merged upstream will automatically get fixed. > > So you want "Fixes: 2dd10de8e6bc" on all these patches? Fixing the problem > requires all of the first three patches together. I didn't indicate which patches to add the tags to, sorry. 3/4 sounds like the right place. If 4/4 is a clean-up only, no new tags apply to that. > My worry is that a > "Fixes" on each implies a complete fix within that patch, so its really not > appropriate. Fixes seems to mean different things to different people. It's OK to drop that tag, but I prefer to see a pointer to the broken commit. That helps downstream consumers of the commit log to identify which patches they should be pulling in. > The stable-kernel-rules.rst documentation says for a series, the Cc: stable > tag should be suffient to request dependencies within the series, so that's > why I suggested it for the version you requested. > > What exactly would you like to see? I am happy to send a 2nd version. You don't need to send again. Christian can add tags in his repo. My objection is to the "# 6.10.x" comment -- that doesn't make sense because for sure, the stable tree will have moved on by the time that v6.13-rc opens. -- Chuck Lever
