On Thu, Mar 08, 2018 at 09:47:54AM -0800, Greg KH wrote: >On Thu, Mar 08, 2018 at 09:39:14AM -0800, Darren Hart wrote: >> On Thu, Mar 08, 2018 at 04:59:01AM +0000, Sasha Levin wrote: >> > From: Santeri Toivonen <santeri.toivonen@xxxxxxxxxx> >> > >> > [ Upstream commit f35823619db8bbaa2afea8705f239c3cecb9d22f ] >> > >> > Asus laptop X302UA starts up with Wi-Fi disabled, >> > without a way to enable it. Set wapf=4 to fix the problem. >> > >> > Signed-off-by: Santeri Toivonen <santeri.toivonen@xxxxxxxxxx> >> > Signed-off-by: Darren Hart (VMware) <dvhart@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> > Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <alexander.levin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> >> Hi Sasha, >> >> I'm curious about this AUTOSEL tag, and what about this patch triggered >> its selection? > >It's "magic"! :) > >Seriously, it's close to magic, there's a tool that Sasha is using that >takes "machine learning" to match patches that we have not applied in >stable kernels to ones that we have, and try to catch those that we >forgot to tag for the stable tree. Not all subsystems mark stable >patches, so this is an attempt to catch those fixes that should be >getting backported but are not either because the developer/maintainer >forgot to mark it as such, or because they just never mark those types >of patches. > >Sasha has a better write up about how this all works somewhere, and >given that this type of question keeps coming up every other week or so, >I think I need to add it to a FAQ somewhere to point people at to make >it more obvious what is happening. It's pretty much a neural network that knows how to classify a "bug fixing patch" based on things such as: - Code metrics - Words in the commit message (the NN knows about the 10,000 most used words, and their likehood to appear in a bug fixing patch). - Which files were modified. - Authors of the commit, and persons who got Cc'ed/Signed-off/etc. So in this case, there are a few things that "helped" this patch get selected: - The word "quirk" in the subject line. - "fix" + "problem" in the commit log. - Modifies drivers/platform/x86/asus-nb-wmi.c which contains mostly quirks. - The patch has minimal changes in code metrics. I don't have exact numbers for this, but it seems that in general patches that do very little have more odds of fixing bugs. And I also manually review all the stuff that get sent out, and to my human brain it looks like something that should be in stable :) -- Thanks, Sasha