netdev - Re: [PATCH v5 1/3] can: length: fix bitstuffing count

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20230620-carmaker-carmaker-c9c2260cee1f-mkl@pengutronix.de>
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2023 15:35:05 +0200
From: Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@...gutronix.de>
To: Vincent MAILHOL <mailhol.vincent@...adoo.fr>
Cc: Simon Horman <simon.horman@...igine.com>,
	"linux-can@...r.kernel.org" <linux-can@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Thomas.Kopp@...rochip.com" <Thomas.Kopp@...rochip.com>,
	"socketcan@...tkopp.net" <socketcan@...tkopp.net>,
	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	"marex@...x.de" <marex@...x.de>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/3] can: length: fix bitstuffing count

On 15.06.2023 18:58:04, Vincent MAILHOL wrote:
> > Lastly, I'm not a CAN maintainer. But I think it's usual to separate
> > fixes and enhancements into different series, likely the former
> > targeting the can tree while the latter targets the can-next tree
> > (I could be way off here).
> 
> Hmm... The fact is that only the first two patches are fixes. The
> third one is not.  The fixes being really minor, there is no urgency.
> So I was thinking of having the full series go to the next branch and
> as long as there is the Fix: tag, the two first patches will
> eventually be picked by the stable team. I thought that this approach
> was easier than sending two fixes to the stable branch, wait for these
> to propagate to next and then send a second series of a single patch
> for next.
> 
> @Marc, let me know what you prefer. I am fine to split if this works
> best for you. Also, I will wait for your answer before doing any
> resend.
> 
> > If on the other hand, the patches in this series are not bug fixes,
> > then it is probably best to drop the 'fixes' language.
> 
> I will keep the Fix tags. Even if minor (probably no visible
> repercussions) it still fixes an existing inaccuracy (whether you call
> it bug or not is another debate, but I often see typo fixes being
> backported, and these are a bit more than a typo fix).

I've taken the whole series as is to linux-can-next.

Thanks,
Marc

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                 | Marc Kleine-Budde          |
Embedded Linux                   | https://www.pengutronix.de |
Vertretung Nürnberg              | Phone: +49-5121-206917-129 |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax:   +49-5121-206917-9   |

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)