On Fri, May 26, 2023 at 08:20:03PM -0500, Tyler Hicks wrote: > On 2023-05-27 07:23:22, 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.' > > Subject: [PATCH 6.1 5.15 5.10 5.4 4.19 4.14] selftests/memfd: Fix unknown type name build failure > > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/stable/20230526232136.255244-1-hargar%40linux.microsoft.com > > > > The check is based on https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/stable-kernel-rules.html > > > > Please ignore this mail if the patch is not relevant for upstream. > > I think Hardik did the right thing here. This is a build failure bug > that's present in stable kernels but was fixed in upstream by an > unrelated commit: > > 11f75a01448f ("selftests/memfd: add tests for MFD_NOEXEC_SEAL MFD_EXEC") > > It wouldn't be right to backport that patch because MFD_NOEXEC_SEAL and > MFD_EXEC weren't introduced until v6.3. > > There was an (unmerged) attempt to fix this specific build failure in upstream: > > https://lore.kernel.org/all/20211203024706.10094-1-luke.nowakowskikrijger@xxxxxxxxxxxxx/ > > Hardik opted to follow what was done upstream in a patch specifically > for the stable tree. Yes, this is the right thing to do, you can ignore the bot :)
