On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 09:59:23AM +0200, Or Gerlitz wrote: > On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 7:31 AM, Leon Romanovsky <leonro@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > 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. > > And what's wrong with that? IMHO the right thing to do for fixes is > > (1) putng the Fixes line > (2) cc the author of the offending patch > > This way you can get them a chance to review the fix and point out to > you problems in the patch that may e.g introduce a 2nd problem or > a side effect you don't envision. This is what we do on netdev, > practically always. Always, are you sure? In the patch c1c1d86bdea4 ("net/mlxfw: Properly handle dependancy with non-loadable mlx5"), you didn't add Fixes tag and didn't add relevant people (Yotam, Arnd and Jakub). It is how it looks in my mailer: Date: Sun, 2 Jul 2017 18:57:28 +0300 From: Or Gerlitz <ogerlitz@xxxxxxxxxxxx> To: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Cc: netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, mlxsw@xxxxxxxxxxxx, Or Gerlitz <ogerlitz@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Subject: [PATCH net-next] net/mlxfw: Properly handle dependancy with non-loadable mlx5 Thanks > > Or. > -- > 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
