Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] docs: submitting-patches: Emphasise the requirement to Cc: stable when using Fixes: tag

[Lee Jones]

On Wed, 13 Jan 2021, Jani Nikula wrote:

> On Wed, 13 Jan 2021, Lee Jones <lee.jones@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Wed, 13 Jan 2021, Jani Nikula wrote:
> >
> >> On Wed, 13 Jan 2021, Lee Jones <lee.jones@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> > Clear-up any confusion surrounding the Fixes: tag with regards to the
> >> > need to Cc: the stable mailing list when submitting stable patch
> >> > candidates.
> >> >
> >> > Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> > Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@xxxxxxx>
> >> > Cc: linux-doc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >> > Signed-off-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >> > ---
> >> > v2:
> >> >  - Link to the 'stable-kernel-rules' document as per Greg's request
> >> >
> >> >  Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst | 5 +++++
> >> >  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
> >> >
> >> > diff --git a/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst b/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst
> >> > index 7c97ad580e7d0..7f48cccc75cdf 100644
> >> > --- a/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst
> >> > +++ b/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst
> >> > @@ -556,6 +556,11 @@ which stable kernel versions should receive your fix. This is the preferred
> >> >  method for indicating a bug fixed by the patch. See :ref:`describe_changes`
> >> >  for more details.
> >> >  
> >> > +Note: Attaching a Fixes: tag does not subvert the stable kernel rules
> >> > +process nor the requirement to Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx on all stable 
> >> > +patch candidates. For more information, please read
> >> > +:ref:`Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst <stable_kernel_rules>`
> >> 
> >> Has there been a process change, or should I take it that a Fixes: tag
> >> without Cc: stable *may* still end up being backported to stable?
> >
> > The 'process' has not changed.  Cc:ing the stable mailing list has
> > been a requirement for years.  This patch clears up the misconception
> > that you (and I ... and many others by all accounts) hold that the
> > Fixes: tag is enough.
> >
> > Fixes: only works when/if Greg and/or Sasha run their magical scripts
> > to scan for them.  By them doing so has "perpetuated a myth that this
> > was the proper thing to do".  It's not.
> 
> I held no misconception here, and we've scripted adding appropriate Cc:
> stable for years along with the Fixes: tag.
> 
> There's been debate in the past whether commits with *only* Fixes:
> should be automatically backported with the magic scripts at all. I
> don't mean to reopen that question now, but that was what I was
> referring to with the process change.

There's an on-going effort to pull in as many stable-worthy patches
as possible from across a plethora of varying sources.  Patches with
Fixes: tags which "forgot" to Cc: the stable mailing list is just one
of those sources.

In answer to the question you didn't ask; there is still a requirement
this scenario to be catered for, IMHO.

-- 
Lee Jones [李琼斯]
Senior Technical Lead - Developer Services
Linaro.org │ Open source software for Arm SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog