On Wed, Jun 12, 2024 at 11:15:45AM +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > I see your point and agree that it would be nice to have. At the same > time I've seen people on the lists that don't like to use the Fixes: tag > when nothing is "fixed". That's correct. Checkpatch stuff, clean ups, and patches which silence *harmless* static checker warnings shouldn't get a Fixes tag. This checkpatch warning doesn't affect that. If you look at the patches which were flagged it's mostly because of CCing stable or syzbot. > And it would be an additional burden for > developers to look the commit-id up. So it could contribute to the > "checkpatch is asking too much here and not worth the trouble" stance > I've seen a few times (to which I contributed myself... :-/ ). Someone's got to do it. It might as well be the person who writes the patch. There are times where you're working across function boundaries or even subsystem boundaries and in those cases finding the correct Fixes tag is difficult. The other case where it's annoying is when the code has moved between files. But it's generally a worthwhile exercise. It helps to look at what the original author was trying to do when they introduced the bug. And when you add a Fixes tag then checkpatch will CC the original author so the review is better as well. regards, dan carpenter
