linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5] checkpatch: check for missing Fixes tags

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: <b3baa059-b433-42da-96c0-588312b5a4ac@leemhuis.info>
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2024 08:46:24 +0200
From: Thorsten Leemhuis <linux@...mhuis.info>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
 Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...aro.org>
Cc: Andy Whitcroft <apw@...onical.com>, Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
 Dwaipayan Ray <dwaipayanray1@...il.com>,
 Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
 Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
 Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>, Tom Gall <tom.gall@...aro.org>,
 kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] checkpatch: check for missing Fixes tags

On 11.06.24 20:38, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Jun 2024 16:43:29 +0300 Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...aro.org> wrote:
> 
>> This check looks for common words that probably indicate a patch
>> is a fix.  For now the regex is:
>>
>> 	(?:(?:BUG: K.|UB)SAN: |Call Trace:|stable\@|syzkaller)/)
>>
>> Why are stable patches encouraged to have a fixes tag?  Some people mark
>> their stable patches as "# 5.10" etc.  This is useful but a Fixes tag is
>> still a good idea.
> 
> I'd say that "# 5.10" is lame

Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst documents this use to
"Point out kernel version prerequisites".

> and it would be good if checkpatch could
> detect this and warn "hey, use a proper Fixes:".  Because
> 
>> It  helps people to not cherry-pick buggy patches without also
>> cherry-picking the fix.
> 
> seems pretty important.

Hmmm. That would lead to false positive when it comes to changes that
for example just add a device ID (and thus do not "Fix" anything) while
having prerequisites that are only available in a specific version.

Ciao, Thorsten