On 24.04.24 20:53, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Wed, 24 Apr 2024 at 09:56, Thorsten Leemhuis > <regressions@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> out of interest: what's your stance on regression fixes sitting in >> subsystem git trees for a week or longer before being mainlined? > > Annoying, but probably depends on circumstances. The fact that it took > a while to even be noticed presumably means it's not common or holding > anything up. Well, I searched and found quite a few users that reported the problem: https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=293971 (at least 4 people) https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=293978 (2 people) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2271136 (1) https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/2061040 (1) https://forums.opensuse.org/t/no-touchpad-found-el-touchpad-a-veces-es-reconocido-por-el-sistema/174100 (1) https://oldos.me/@jay/112294956758222518 (1) There are also these two I mentioned earlier already: https://social.lol/@major/112294920993272987 (1) https://lore.kernel.org/all/9a880b2b-2a28-4647-9f0f-223f9976fdee@xxxxxxxxxxx/ (1) Side note: there were more discussions about it here: https://forums.lenovo.com/t5/Fedora/PSA-Z16-Gen-2-touchpad-not-working-on-kernel-6-8/m-p/5299530 https://www.reddit.com/r/thinkpad/comments/1bwxwnr/review_thinkpad_z16_gen_2_with_arch_linux/ https://www.reddit.com/r/linuxhardware/comments/1bwxhwa/review_thinkpad_z16_gen_2_arch_linux/ And the arch linux wiki even documents a workaround: https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Lenovo_ThinkPad_Z16_Gen_2#Initialization_failure Those are just the reports and discussions I found. And you know how it is: many people that struggle will never report a problem. IMHO this all casts a bad light on our "no regression" rule, as the fix is ready, just not mainlined and backported. And as I mentioned: I see similar situations all the time. That's why I made noise here. > That said, th4e last HID pull I have is from March 14. If the issue is > just that there's nothing else happening, I think people should just > point me to the patch and say "can you apply this single fix?" Then I'll likely do so in my regression reports more often. Is cherry picking from -next as easy for you? Maintainers sometimes improve small details when merging a fix, so it might be better to take fixes from there instead of pulling them from lore. Ciao, Thorsten P.S: Wondering if I should team up with the kernel package maintainers of Arch Linux, Fedora, and openSUSE and start a git tree based on the latest stable tree with additional fixes and reverts for regressions not yet fixed upstream...[1] But that feels kinda wrong: it IMHO would be better to resolve those problems quickly in the proper upstream trees. [1] yes, I'm fully aware that such a tree can only address some of the issues; but from what I see that already would make quite a difference.
