[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <m2k49xxusb.fsf@bob.laptop.org>
Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2011 14:20:20 -0400
From: Chris Ball <cjb@...top.org>
To: ian@...menth.co.uk
Cc: Guennadi Liakhovetski <g.liakhovetski@....de>,
Axel Lin <axel.lin@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mmc: tmio: eliminate unused variable 'mmc' warning
Hi Ian,
On Sat, Aug 27 2011, Ian Molton wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-08-03 at 08:55 -0400, Chris Ball wrote:
>> > Good for 3.1, do we also push such "harmless" compiler warning fixes
>> > to stable?
>> >
>> > Acked-by: Guennadi Liakhovetski <g.liakhovetski@....de>
>>
>> Pushed for 3.1, thanks. I don't think this is appropriate for stable.
>
> Why on earth not? its obviously correct...
Because the rules for stable@ consist of more than the patch being
obviously correct.
You seem to have chosen one stable@ rule that this patch meets, and
ignored the other nine which it mostly does not meet:
Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt:
- It must fix a real bug that bothers people (not a, "This could be a
problem..." type thing).
- 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.
- It cannot contain any "trivial" fixes in it (spelling changes,
whitespace cleanups, etc).
Thanks,
- Chris.
--
Chris Ball <cjb@...top.org> <http://printf.net/>
One Laptop Per Child
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists