Re: Patch "spi: axi-spi-engine: Convert to platform remove callback returning void" has been added to the 6.1-stable tree

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Mon, May 13, 2024 at 8:07 AM Greg KH <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Tue, May 07, 2024 at 11:39:58PM +0900, Mark Brown wrote:
> > On Tue, May 07, 2024 at 09:22:48AM -0500, David Lechner wrote:
> >
> > > It's just fixing a theoretical problem, not one that has actually
> > > caused problems for people. The stable guidelines I read [1] said we
> > > shouldn't include fixes like that.
> >
> > > [1]: https://docs.kernel.org/process/stable-kernel-rules.html
> >
> > > So, sure it would probably be harmless to include it without the
> > > other dependencies. But not sure it is worth the effort for only
> > > a theoretical problem.
> >
> > The written stable guidelines don't really reflect what's going on with
> > stable these days at all, these days it's very aggressive with what it
> > backports.
>
> It's "aggressive" in that many dependent patches are finally being
> properly found and backported as needed to be able to get the "real" fix
> applied properly.  That's all, nothing odd here, and all of these
> commits have been through proper review and development and acceptance
> already, so it's not like they are brand new things, they are required
> for real fixes.
>
> > Personally I tend to be a lot more conservative than this
> > and would tend to agree that this isn't a great candidate for
> > backporting but people seem OK with this sort of stuff.
>
> Again, we want to keep as close as possible with Linus's tree because
> ALMOST EVERY time we try to do our own thing, we get something wrong.
> Keeping in sync is essencial to rely on our overall testing and future
> fix ability to keep in sync properly.
>
> To attempt to do "one off" backports all over the place just does not
> work, we have tried it and failed.  To not accept the fix at all leaves
> us vulnerable to a known bug, why would that be ok?
>
> Change is good, and these changes are extra-good as they fix things.
>


I see there are differences in opinion of what a "real" problem is.
And it sounds like the opinions have been shifting while I was away
from kernel development for a few years.

If you prefer to take this patch and all of it's dependencies to keep
things as close to mainline as possible, I guess that is fine.





[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux