On Wed, Apr 05, 2023 at 03:33:20PM +0200, Pratyush Yadav wrote: > On Wed, Apr 05 2023, Greg KH wrote: > > > On Wed, Apr 05, 2023 at 02:26:04PM +0200, Greg KH wrote: > >> On Wed, Apr 05, 2023 at 01:47:52PM +0200, Pratyush Yadav wrote: > >> > On Wed, Apr 05 2023, kernel test robot wrote: > >> > > >> > > Hi, > >> > > > >> > > Thanks for your patch. > >> > > > >> > > FYI: kernel test robot notices the stable kernel rule is not satisfied. > >> > > > >> > > Rule: 'Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx' or 'commit <sha1> upstream.' > >> > > >> > I think the robot should also learn to look at the 'To:' header :-) > >> > >> Nope, the robot is correct, you submitted this incorrectly. > > > > Wait, maybe, I can't tell. > > My point is that it does not matter much if stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx is in > Cc or To. It gets the email regardless. In fact, that seems quite a > common practice to me [0][1]. So I'd say it would be nice if the robot > did not needlessly complain about this. The robot replaces my bot (well, aguments this), and it rightfully flags many patches that are sent to stable that are not done so correctly, so that the submitter can then fix them up. The number of "false positives" like this is pretty low, as hey, even I got it wrong when reading this "by hand". thanks, greg k-h
