On Wed, Oct 16, 2024 at 09:41:11AM +0200, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
> Em Wed, 2 Oct 2024 17:53:29 +0100
> Colin Ian King <colin.i.king@xxxxxxxxx> escreveu:
>
> > The function ub960_rxport_read is being called and afterwards ret is
> > being checked for any failures, however ret is not being assigned to
> > the return of the function call. Fix this by assigning ret to the
> > return of the call which appears to be missing.
> >
> > Fixes: afe267f2d368 ("media: i2c: add DS90UB960 driver")
> > Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.i.king@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> No Cc: stable. Please follow the submission rules for fixes as stated
> at:
> Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst
>
> In summary, all patches containing fixes shall have a Cc stable. There
> are rules there for the very few exceptions where a patch is not meant
> to be backported:
>
> Cc: <stable+noautosel@xxxxxxxxxx> # reason goes here, and must be present
>
I don't think this patch belongs in stable. It's doesn't fix a real life bug,
it's just static checker stuff. I also don't think we should forbid it from
going to stable if it's required as a dependency to backport a different patch.
regards,
dan carpenter
