[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <f1912a83-0840-4e82-9a60-9a59f1657694@lunn.ch>
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2025 14:21:04 +0100
From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To: Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@...nel.org>
Cc: "Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
Kunihiko Hayashi <hayashi.kunihiko@...ionext.com>,
Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@...s.st.com>,
Jose Abreu <joabreu@...opsys.com>,
Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 0/3] net: stmmac: Fix usage of maximum queue number
macros
> I'm not very familiar with the difference between net and net-next,
> but I think this series should be backported to stable branches.
https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/stable-kernel-rules.html
It must either fix a real bug that bothers people or just add a
device ID.
Does this really bother people? Have we seen bug reports?
There is another aspect to this. We are adding warnings saying that
the device tree blob is broken. That should encourage users to upgrade
their device tree blob. But most won't find any newer version. If this
goes into net-next, the roll out will be a lot slower, developers on
the leading edge will find the DT issue and submit a DT patch. By the
time this is in a distro kernel, maybe most of the DT issues will
already be fixed?
Andrew
Powered by blists - more mailing lists