Hi! > > You've missed the 5.10 mail :) > > You mean in the flood? ;-P > > > Pavel objected to it so I've dropped it: https://lore.kernel.org/all/Zbli7QIGVFT8EtO4@sashalap/ > > So we're not backporting those anymore? But everything else? :-P > > And 5.15 has it already... > > Frankly, with the amount of stuff going into stable, I see no problem with > backporting such patches. Especially if the people using stable kernels will > end up backporting it themselves and thus multiply work. I.e., Erwan's case. Well, some people would prefer -stable to only contain fixes for critical things, as documented. stable-kernel-rules.rst: - It must fix a problem that causes a build error (but not for things marked CONFIG_BROKEN), an oops, a hang, data corruption, a real security issue, or some "oh, that's not good" issue. In short, something critical. Now, you are right that reality and documentation are not exactly "aligned". I don't care much about which one is fixed, but I'd really like them to match (because that's what our users expect). Best regards, Pavel -- DENX Software Engineering GmbH, Managing Director: Erika Unter HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
