On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 04:38:41PM -0700, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 10:27:42PM +0000, Parav Pandit wrote: > > > > On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 12:13 AM, Parav Pandit <parav@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > wrote: > > > >> From: Or Gerlitz [mailto:gerlitz.or@xxxxxxxxx] > > > > > > >> any reason not to point out the commit that introduced the bug? > > > > No particular reason. I am not sure few years back it was bug or not. In current > > > code it appear so. > > > > So I continued without Fixes commit line. > > > > > > > > > The idea is that you do the git blaming and such work to get the > > > Fixes line, and later, the maintainer of the sub-system and > > > maintainers of stable kernel use that to decide if/where they want > > > this to go beyond the -rc kernel you are fixing > > > Yes, I understand. But would that be a bug in initial commit, which > > transport was it handling.. without error code check what could have > > gone wrong.. I do not have answer for those questions. So I omitted > > the Fixes line. Wherever I knew for sure in this or other series, I > > have added. > > While the fixes line is nice, the more important question is if any of > these patches should have a 'Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxx' ? No, this is why I didn't ask to add Fixes line, because stable@ takes patches in semi-automatic mode by looking after Fixes line. Thanks > > Jason > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
