Re: [PATCH v9 06/10] serial: sc16is7xx: fix regression with GPIO configuration

[Greg KH <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, Aug 04, 2023 at 12:04:29AM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 3, 2023 at 5:18 PM Hugo Villeneuve <hugo@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Mon, 31 Jul 2023 17:58:41 +0200
> > Greg KH <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jul 25, 2023 at 10:23:38AM -0400, Hugo Villeneuve wrote:
> 
> ...
> 
> > > > Fixes: 679875d1d880 ("sc16is7xx: Separate GPIOs from modem control lines")
> > > > Fixes: 21144bab4f11 ("sc16is7xx: Handle modem status lines")
> > > > Cc: <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> # 6.1.x: 95982fad dt-bindings: sc16is7xx: Add property to change GPIO function
> > > > Cc: <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> # 6.1.x: 1584d572 serial: sc16is7xx: refactor GPIO controller registration
> > > > Cc: <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> # 6.1.x: ac2caa5a serial: sc16is7xx: remove obsolete out_thread label
> > > > Cc: <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> # 6.1.x: d90961ad serial: sc16is7xx: mark IOCONTROL register as volatile
> > > > Cc: <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> # 6.1.x: 6dae3bad serial: sc16is7xx: fix broken port 0 uart init
> > >
> > > Where are these git commit ids from?  I don't see them in Linus's tree,
> > > how are they supposed to be picked up by the stable developers if they
> > > are not valid ones?
> > >
> > > confused,
> 
> ...
> 
> > I wrongly assumed that, for example, this patch had, as a prerequisite,
> > all the patches before it in this series, and that is why I listed
> > them.

That's fine, but if you have already marked those patches for stable
inclusion, no need to list them here too.

> The problem, as I understand it, is not that you listed them (how else
> will the backporter know that this patch requires something else?) but
> the format (you used wrong SHA-1 sums).

Exactly, those are invalid sha1 values.

> > So I will remove them all, since this patch doesn't have any other
> > requisites other than the previous patches in this series.
> >
> > Maybe it would be good to add some notes about that in
> > stable-kernel-rules.rst?
> 
> This probably is a good idea. Briefly looking at it I see no examples
> like yours there.

Because it's not a thing?  Just mark all of these patches in the series
as cc: stable@ and all will happen automatically for you.  Nothing
fancy or complex here, happens daily in other subsystems just fine :)

thanks,

greg k-h