On Wed, Jul 14, 2021 at 11:35:29AM -0400, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote: > Another solution (and these don't have to be mutually exclusive) might > be for maintainers can explicitly state that certain patches shouldn't > be backported into stable kernels. I think having an explicit > "No-Backport: <Reason>" might be useful, since it documents why a > maintainer requested that the patch not be backported, and being an > explicit tag, it makes it clear that it wasn't just a case of the > developer forgetting the "Cc: stable" tag. This makes it much better > than implicit rules such as "If from: akpm then don't backport" hidden > in various stable maintainers' scripts. The number of valid cases where someone puts a "Fixes:" tag, and that patch should NOT be backported is really really slim. Why would you put that tag and not want to have known-broken kernels fixed? If it really is not an issue, just do not put the "Fixes:" tag? thanks, greg k-h
