On Fri, Nov 29, 2024 at 10:45:48AM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
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).
You should consider reading past the first bullet in that section :)
- Serious issues as reported by a user of a distribution kernel may also
be considered if they fix a notable performance or interactivity issue.
It sounds like what's going on here, no?
--
Thanks,
Sasha
