linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Documentation: stable: Add rule on what kind of patches are accepted

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

Message-ID: <5fe3c17b-44c3-1e1a-9ac5-1db8766120f4@linaro.org>
Date:   Thu, 22 Dec 2022 15:01:32 +0200
From:   Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@...aro.org>
To:     Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@...il.com>, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
        sashal@...nel.org, corbet@....net
Cc:     stable@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, joneslee@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Documentation: stable: Add rule on what kind of patches
 are accepted

Hi,

On 22.12.2022 14:56, Bagas Sanjaya wrote:
> On 12/22/22 16:16, Tudor Ambarus wrote:
>> The list of rules on what kind of patches are accepted, and which ones
>> are not into the “-stable” tree, did not mention anything about new
>> features and let the reader use its own judgement. One may be under the
>> impression that new features are not accepted at all, but that's not true:
>> new features are not accepted unless they fix a reported problem.
>> Update documentation with missing rule.
>>
> 
> Are there any other examples of problems that can "only" be solved by
> introducing new features? Or new huge features that are virtually
> harder to backport?
> 

Here's an example:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kernel/20221222083545.1972489-1-tudor.ambarus@linaro.org/