linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/1] On DRM -> stable process

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: <20241108-267fb65587d32642092cea40-pchelkin@ispras.ru>
Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2024 11:41:18 +0300
From: Fedor Pchelkin <pchelkin@...ras.ru>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc: Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>, stable@...r.kernel.org,
	Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@....com>,
	Harry Wentland <harry.wentland@....com>,
	Leo Li <sunpeng.li@....com>,
	Rodrigo Siqueira <Rodrigo.Siqueira@....com>,
	Christian König <christian.koenig@....com>,
	"Pan, Xinhui" <Xinhui.Pan@....com>,
	David Airlie <airlied@...il.com>, Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
	Fangzhi Zuo <Jerry.Zuo@....com>, Wayne Lin <wayne.lin@....com>,
	amd-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, lvc-project@...uxtesting.org,
	Alexey Khoroshilov <khoroshilov@...ras.ru>,
	Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@....com>,
	Jonathan Gray <jsg@....id.au>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/1] On DRM -> stable process

On Tue, 05. Nov 07:57, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 04, 2024 at 05:55:28PM +0300, Fedor Pchelkin wrote:
> > It is just strange that the (exact same) change made by the commits is
> > duplicated by backporting tools. As it is not the first case where DRM
> > patches are involved per Greg's statement [1], I wonder if something can be
> > done on stable-team's side to avoid such odd behavior in future.
> 
> No, all of this mess needs to be fixed up on the drm developer's side,
> they are the ones doing this type of crazy "let's commit the same patch
> to multiple branches and then reference a commit that will show up at an
> unknown time in the future and hope for the best!" workflow.
> 
> I'm amazed it works at all, they get to keep fixing up this mess as this
> is entirely self-inflicted.

Thanks for reply, I get your remark. DRM people are mostly CC'ed here,
hopefully it won't be that difficult to tune their established workflow to
make the stable process easier and more straightforward.

As of now, would you mind to take the revert for 6.1? It's [PATCH 1/1] in
this thread. No point to keep it there, and the duplicated commits were
already reverted from the fresher stable kernels.