On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 4:56 AM Sasha Levin <sashal@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Sun, Apr 12, 2020 at 10:59:35AM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > >On Sun, 12 Apr 2020 10:10:22 +0300 Or Gerlitz wrote: > >> On Sun, Apr 12, 2020 at 2:16 AM Sasha Levin <sashal@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> > [ Upstream commit 6783e8b29f636383af293a55336f036bc7ad5619 ] > >> > >> Sasha, > >> > >> This was pushed to net-next without a fixes tag, and there're probably > >> reasons for that. > >> As you can see the possible null deref is not even reproducible without another > >> patch which for itself was also net-next and not net one. > >> > >> If a team is not pushing patch to net nor putting a fixes that, I > >> don't think it's correct > > While it's great that you're putting the effort into adding a fixes tag > to your commits, I'm not sure what a fixes tag has to do with inclusion > in a stable tree. > > It's a great help when we look into queueing something up, but on it's > own it doesn't imply anything. > > >> to go and pick that into stable and from there to customer production kernels. > > This mail is your two week warning that this patch might get queued to > stable, nothing was actually queued just yet. > > >> Alsom, I am not sure what's the idea behind the auto-selection concept, e.g for > >> mlx5 the maintainer is specifically pointing which patches should go > >> to stable and > > I'm curious, how does this process work? Is it on a mailing list > somewhere? > > >> to what releases there and this is done with care and thinking ahead, why do we > >> want to add on that? and why this can be something which is just > >> automatic selection? > >> > >> We have customers running production system with LTS 4.4.x and 4.9.y (along with > >> 4.14.z and 4.19.w) kernels, we put lots of care thinking if/what > >> should go there, I don't > >> see a benefit from adding auto-selection, the converse. > > > >FWIW I had the same thoughts about the nfp driver, and I indicated to > >Sasha to skip it in the auto selection, which AFAICT worked nicely. > > > >Maybe we should communicate more clearly that maintainers who carefully > >select patches for stable should opt out of auto-selection? > > I've added drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/ to my blacklist for auto > selection. It's very easy to opt out, just ask... I've never argued with > anyone around this - the maintainers of any given subsystem know about > it way better than me. Just to make sure, does this excluding of mlx5 happens immediately, that is, applies also to all non committed patches that you already posted? IMHO - I think it should be the other way around, you should get approval from sub-system maintainers to put their code in charge into auto-selection, unless there's kernel summit decision that says otherwise, is this documented anywhere?
