Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] In-place module initialisation

From: Valentin Obst
Date: Fri Mar 29 2024 - 11:09:53 EST


> > I think the idea in [1] was to have this patch being included in the
> > stable trees. I got little experience with stable trees but wouldn't the
> > easiest way be that you add:
> >
> > Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx # 6.8.x: 715dd8950d4e rust: phy: implement `Send` for `Registration`
> > Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Fixes: 247b365dc8dc ("rust: add `kernel` crate")
> >
> > in the sign-off section for this patch? (Or mark the first one for stable
> > inclusion as well, [2] has more information on that).
>
> 715dd8950d4e is your local hash for 1/5, right? So I would drop the
> hash, because it may be confusing.

Ah, right, of course this won't be the hash of the commit in mainline;

>
> It may be possible to remove the first line (since 1/5 will only apply
> to 6.8.x and it is already the previous patch in the series, while the

If I interpret the docs correctly, previous patches in the same series are
only implicitly considered as prerequisites for the marked patch if they
are marked themselves:

"[...] you do not have to list patch1 as prerequisite of patch2
if you have already marked patch1 for stable inclusion."

So I guess it is important to be explicit.

> `Fixes` tag here may make it clear that 2/5 should still go everywhere
> regardless of 1/5), but I guess it does not hurt to be extra clear.
>
> What about:
>
> Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx # 6.8.x: rust: phy: implement `Send`
> for `Registration`
> Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx # 6.1+
> Fixes: 247b365dc8dc ("rust: add `kernel` crate")

Looks reasonable to me; Also think that the 6.1+ is not striclty necessary
due to the `Fixes` tag though.

- Best Valentin

>
> Cheers,
> Miguel