[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180117130407.unwy6noeorzretvn@pathway.suse.cz>
Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2018 14:04:07 +0100
From: Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
To: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
rostedt@...e.goodmis.org, Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@....com>,
Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 0/2] printk: Console owner and waiter logic cleanup
On Wed 2018-01-17 11:18:56, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> On (01/16/18 10:45), Steven Rostedt wrote:
> [..]
> > > [1] https://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=145692016122716
> >
> > Especially since Konstantin is working on pulling in all LKML archives,
> > the above should be denoted as:
> >
> > Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/201603022101.CAH73907.OVOOMFHFFtQJSL%20()%20I-love%20!%20SAKURA%20!%20ne%20!%20jp
>
> hm, may I ask why? is there a new rule now to percent-encode commit messages?
IMHO, the most important thing is that Steven's link is based
on the Message-ID and the stable redirector
https://lkml.kernel.org/. It has a better chance to work
even in the future.
I have been asked by other people to use this type
of links as well.
> > Although the above is for linux-mm and not LKML (it still works), I
> > should ask Konstantin if he will be pulling in any of the other
> > archives. Perhaps have both? (in case marc.info goes away).
> >
> > > Fixes: 6b97a20d3a79 ("printk: set may_schedule for some of console_trylock() callers")
> >
> > Should we Cc stable@...r.kernel.org?
>
> that's a good question... maybe yes, maybe no... I'd say this
> change is "safer" when we have hand-off.
I would keep it as is in stable kernels unless there are
many bug reports.
Best Regards,
Petr
Powered by blists - more mailing lists