linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v1 0/3] docs: stable-kernel-rules: add delayed backporting option and a few tweaks

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]

Date:   Tue, 11 Jul 2023 10:57:35 +0200
From:   Thorsten Leemhuis <linux@...mhuis.info>
To:     Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>
Cc:     Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, stable@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v1 0/3] docs: stable-kernel-rules: add delayed
 backporting option and a few tweaks

On 11.07.23 10:42, Johan Hovold wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 10, 2023 at 07:18:43PM +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>> On 10.07.23 19:10, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> 
>>>  * For patches that may have kernel version prerequisites specify them using
>>>    the following format in the sign-off area:
>>>
>>>    .. code-block:: none
>>>
>>>      Cc: <stable@...r.kernel.org> # 3.3.x
>>>
>>>    The tag has the meaning of:
>>>
>>>    .. code-block:: none
>>>
>>>      git cherry-pick <this commit>
>>>
>>>    For each "-stable" tree starting with the specified version.
>>
>> /me wonders if something like a "note, such tagging is unnecessary if
>> the appropriate version can be derived from a Fixes: tag" would be
>> appropriate and worth it here
> 
> Having these comments in the patch itself makes it easier to determine
> whether a fix addresses a recent regression or an issue that's been
> around since forever without having to copy-paste and look up each
> commit in the Fixes tag(s).

Hmmm. But that can be misleading, as something like "Cc:
<stable@...r.kernel.org> # 3.3.x" might only have been used because the
submitter only tested if the change applies and works there while not
bothering with earlier kernels; similar things can happen if 3.2 and
earlier required changes to the patch due to API changes or file
movements the submitter was not willing to handle.

But I don't care. I already integrated a change like outlined earlier in
my local WIP document, but I can quickly remove it again.

Ciao, Thorsten