[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2023080434-outcast-preheated-29b1@gregkh>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2023 06:53:00 +0200
From: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
Cc: Hugo Villeneuve <hugo@...ovil.com>, robh+dt@...nel.org,
krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org, conor+dt@...nel.org,
jirislaby@...nel.org, jringle@...dpoint.com,
isaac.true@...onical.com, jesse.sung@...onical.com,
l.perczak@...lintechnologies.com, tomasz.mon@...lingroup.com,
linux-serial@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org,
Hugo Villeneuve <hvilleneuve@...onoff.com>,
stable@...r.kernel.org, Lech Perczak <lech.perczak@...lingroup.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 06/10] serial: sc16is7xx: fix regression with GPIO
configuration
On Fri, Aug 04, 2023 at 12:04:29AM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 3, 2023 at 5:18 PM Hugo Villeneuve <hugo@...ovil.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, 31 Jul 2023 17:58:41 +0200
> > Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jul 25, 2023 at 10:23:38AM -0400, Hugo Villeneuve wrote:
>
> ...
>
> > > > Fixes: 679875d1d880 ("sc16is7xx: Separate GPIOs from modem control lines")
> > > > Fixes: 21144bab4f11 ("sc16is7xx: Handle modem status lines")
> > > > Cc: <stable@...r.kernel.org> # 6.1.x: 95982fad dt-bindings: sc16is7xx: Add property to change GPIO function
> > > > Cc: <stable@...r.kernel.org> # 6.1.x: 1584d572 serial: sc16is7xx: refactor GPIO controller registration
> > > > Cc: <stable@...r.kernel.org> # 6.1.x: ac2caa5a serial: sc16is7xx: remove obsolete out_thread label
> > > > Cc: <stable@...r.kernel.org> # 6.1.x: d90961ad serial: sc16is7xx: mark IOCONTROL register as volatile
> > > > Cc: <stable@...r.kernel.org> # 6.1.x: 6dae3bad serial: sc16is7xx: fix broken port 0 uart init
> > >
> > > Where are these git commit ids from? I don't see them in Linus's tree,
> > > how are they supposed to be picked up by the stable developers if they
> > > are not valid ones?
> > >
> > > confused,
>
> ...
>
> > I wrongly assumed that, for example, this patch had, as a prerequisite,
> > all the patches before it in this series, and that is why I listed
> > them.
That's fine, but if you have already marked those patches for stable
inclusion, no need to list them here too.
> The problem, as I understand it, is not that you listed them (how else
> will the backporter know that this patch requires something else?) but
> the format (you used wrong SHA-1 sums).
Exactly, those are invalid sha1 values.
> > So I will remove them all, since this patch doesn't have any other
> > requisites other than the previous patches in this series.
> >
> > Maybe it would be good to add some notes about that in
> > stable-kernel-rules.rst?
>
> This probably is a good idea. Briefly looking at it I see no examples
> like yours there.
Because it's not a thing? Just mark all of these patches in the series
as cc: stable@ and all will happen automatically for you. Nothing
fancy or complex here, happens daily in other subsystems just fine :)
thanks,
greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists