linux-kernel - Re: Is Fixes line enough?

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 23 Oct 2018 20:08:21 +0200 (CEST)
From:   Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>
To:     Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>
cc:     Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>,
        Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@...inger.net>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-wireless <linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Is Fixes line enough?

On Tue, 23 Oct 2018, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:

> > Ah, I didn't get that you were trying to suggest that things only go 
> > into stable if it has both Fixes: *and* Cc: Stable.
> >
> > If that's the problem you were trying to solve, perhaps we could ask
> > Stephen Rothwell if he would be willing to run a script that sends
> > nag-o-grams to Maintainers who incluce patches in linux-next that have
> > Cc: stable but neither Fixes nor a "# 4.x" appended to the end of the
> > Cc: stable line?
> >
> 
> Patches adding new PCI/USB/ACPI IDs or DMI quirks are usually accepted
> into stable but normally lack "Fixes" tag.

That could easily be made an easily identifiable exception to the rule 
though.

-- 
Jiri Kosina
SUSE Labs