On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 04:37:25PM +0200, Rasmus Villemoes wrote: > On 23/10/2020 16.22, Greg KH wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 03:40:26PM +0200, Rasmus Villemoes wrote: > >> Hi, > >> > >> Please consider whether > >> > >> commit 548b8b5168c90c42e88f70fcf041b4ce0b8e7aa8 > >> Author: Rasmus Villemoes <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> Date: Thu Sep 17 08:56:11 2020 +0200 > >> > >> scripts/setlocalversion: make git describe output more reliable > >> > >> qualifies for -stable. > > > > Looks like it qualifies, how far back do you want it to go? > > > > Cool, thanks. I think we have a project using 4.9.y, certainly we have > projects based on 4.19 and 5.4 - so might as well make it all of the > ones listed on kernel.org currently. > > > And yes, backported patches always make it much easier to apply :) > > OK. How do you prefer to get those? Individual patch emails with [PATCH > X.Y-stable] in subject? That works. > Or should I put them in a git repo you can cherry-pick them from? git repos don't work, email does :) > Should I include the "Commit 548b8b5168c90c42e88f70fcf041b4ce0b8e7aa8 > upstream" line? Yes please. > How about notes on how it differs from the upstream commit (e.g. when > just the context uses `` instead of $() or similar)? That is also nice to have, if possible, whatever you feel like doing here. thanks, greg k-h
