All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>,
	dri-devel <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	armijn@tjaldur.nl, Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com>,
	Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@suse.de>,
	Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@amd.com>,
	Dave Airlie <airlied@redhat.com>, stable <stable@vger.kernel.org>,
	Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Emil Velikov <emil.velikov@collabora.com>
Subject: Re: WTF: patch "[PATCH] drm/mgag200: Remove declaration of mgag200_mmap() from header" was seriously submitted to be applied to the 5.8-stable tree?
Date: Sat, 8 Aug 2020 13:29:08 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200808112908.GA3063898@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKMK7uF2zeOS714mq2Y29TgjLB7h3A51FhKs70YL+kK84DCyRQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Sat, Aug 08, 2020 at 01:02:34PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 8, 2020 at 12:24 PM Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, Aug 08, 2020 at 11:13:54AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > > On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 3:54 PM Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@suse.de> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi
> > > >
> > > > Am 07.08.20 um 15:30 schrieb gregkh@linuxfoundation.org:
> > > > > The patch below was submitted to be applied to the 5.8-stable tree.
> > > > >
> > > > > I fail to see how this patch meets the stable kernel rules as found at
> > > > > Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst.
> > > > >
> > > > > I could be totally wrong, and if so, please respond to
> > > > > <stable@vger.kernel.org> and let me know why this patch should be
> > > > > applied.  Otherwise, it is now dropped from my patch queues, never to be
> > > > > seen again.
> > > >
> > > > Sorry for the noise. There's no reason this should go into stable.
> > >
> > > We have a little script in our maintainer toolbox for bugfixes, which
> > > generates the Fixes: line, adds everyone from the original commit to
> > > the cc: list and also adds Cc: stable if that sha1 the patch fixes is
> > > in a release already.
> > >
> > > I guess we trained people a bit too much on using Fixes: tags like
> > > that with the tooling, since they often do that for checkpatch stuff
> > > and spelling fixes like this here too. I think the autoselect bot also
> > > loves Fixes: tags a bit too much for its own good.
> > >
> > > Not sure what to do, since telling people to "please sprinkle less
> > > Fixes: tags" doesn't sound great either. I also don't want to tell
> > > people to use the maintainer toolbox less, the autogenerated cc: list
> > > is generally the right thing to do. Maybe best if the stable team
> > > catches the obvious ones before adding them to the stable queue, if
> > > you're ok with that Greg?
> >
> > As I think this is the first time that I've had this problem for a DRM
> > submission, I don't think it's a big issue yet at all, so whatever you
> > are doing today is fine.
> >
> > I do think that the number of patches submitted for stable for
> > drm-related issues feels very very low given the rate of change and
> > number of overall patches you all submit to the kernel, so if anything,
> > you all should be increasing the number of times you tag stuff for
> > stable, not reducing it :)
> 
> Ok, sounds like we should encourage people to use the Fixes: tag and
> auto-cc tooling more, not less.
> 
> I also crunched some quick numbers:
> commits with cc: stable in drm/amd: 2.6%
> ... in drm/i915: 2.5%
> ... drm overall: 2.3%
> drivers/ overall: 3.1%
> 
> So from a quick look no big outliers at least, maybe not quite enough
> cc: stable from smaller drivers (i915+amd is about 60% of everything
> in drm). This is for the past year. Compared to drivers/ overall a bit
> lower, but not drastically so. At least if I didn't screw up my
> scripting.

Seems about right, so on those averages, you have missed about 40-50
patches that should have been cc:ed stable.

However, you are comparing yourself against stuff like drivers/net/
which shouldn't have cc: stable for most stuff (as per the networking
workflow), and other subsystems that seem to never want to cc: stable
for various reasons (offenders not mentioned to be nice...)

So let's bump that number up a bit, maybe you are missing 100 patches
this past year that should have been backported?

Feels like you all could tag more, even if the number is only 40-50 :)

Oh wait, are you sure you don't count the horrid "double commits" where
you backport something from your development branch to your "for linus"
branch, and have cc: stable on both, so that during the -rc1 merge
window I see a ton of commits that are already in the tree?  That would
inflate your numbers a lot more so your real percentages might be a lot
lower...

fun with math.

greg k-h
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
Cc: "Thomas Zimmermann" <tzimmermann@suse.de>,
	dri-devel <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	"Dave Airlie" <airlied@redhat.com>,
	"Alex Deucher" <alexander.deucher@amd.com>,
	armijn@tjaldur.nl, "Emil Velikov" <emil.velikov@collabora.com>,
	"Gerd Hoffmann" <kraxel@redhat.com>,
	"Krzysztof Kozlowski" <krzk@kernel.org>,
	"Noralf Trønnes" <noralf@tronnes.org>,
	"Sam Ravnborg" <sam@ravnborg.org>,
	stable <stable@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: WTF: patch "[PATCH] drm/mgag200: Remove declaration of mgag200_mmap() from header" was seriously submitted to be applied to the 5.8-stable tree?
Date: Sat, 8 Aug 2020 13:29:08 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200808112908.GA3063898@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKMK7uF2zeOS714mq2Y29TgjLB7h3A51FhKs70YL+kK84DCyRQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Sat, Aug 08, 2020 at 01:02:34PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 8, 2020 at 12:24 PM Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, Aug 08, 2020 at 11:13:54AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > > On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 3:54 PM Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@suse.de> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi
> > > >
> > > > Am 07.08.20 um 15:30 schrieb gregkh@linuxfoundation.org:
> > > > > The patch below was submitted to be applied to the 5.8-stable tree.
> > > > >
> > > > > I fail to see how this patch meets the stable kernel rules as found at
> > > > > Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst.
> > > > >
> > > > > I could be totally wrong, and if so, please respond to
> > > > > <stable@vger.kernel.org> and let me know why this patch should be
> > > > > applied.  Otherwise, it is now dropped from my patch queues, never to be
> > > > > seen again.
> > > >
> > > > Sorry for the noise. There's no reason this should go into stable.
> > >
> > > We have a little script in our maintainer toolbox for bugfixes, which
> > > generates the Fixes: line, adds everyone from the original commit to
> > > the cc: list and also adds Cc: stable if that sha1 the patch fixes is
> > > in a release already.
> > >
> > > I guess we trained people a bit too much on using Fixes: tags like
> > > that with the tooling, since they often do that for checkpatch stuff
> > > and spelling fixes like this here too. I think the autoselect bot also
> > > loves Fixes: tags a bit too much for its own good.
> > >
> > > Not sure what to do, since telling people to "please sprinkle less
> > > Fixes: tags" doesn't sound great either. I also don't want to tell
> > > people to use the maintainer toolbox less, the autogenerated cc: list
> > > is generally the right thing to do. Maybe best if the stable team
> > > catches the obvious ones before adding them to the stable queue, if
> > > you're ok with that Greg?
> >
> > As I think this is the first time that I've had this problem for a DRM
> > submission, I don't think it's a big issue yet at all, so whatever you
> > are doing today is fine.
> >
> > I do think that the number of patches submitted for stable for
> > drm-related issues feels very very low given the rate of change and
> > number of overall patches you all submit to the kernel, so if anything,
> > you all should be increasing the number of times you tag stuff for
> > stable, not reducing it :)
> 
> Ok, sounds like we should encourage people to use the Fixes: tag and
> auto-cc tooling more, not less.
> 
> I also crunched some quick numbers:
> commits with cc: stable in drm/amd: 2.6%
> ... in drm/i915: 2.5%
> ... drm overall: 2.3%
> drivers/ overall: 3.1%
> 
> So from a quick look no big outliers at least, maybe not quite enough
> cc: stable from smaller drivers (i915+amd is about 60% of everything
> in drm). This is for the past year. Compared to drivers/ overall a bit
> lower, but not drastically so. At least if I didn't screw up my
> scripting.

Seems about right, so on those averages, you have missed about 40-50
patches that should have been cc:ed stable.

However, you are comparing yourself against stuff like drivers/net/
which shouldn't have cc: stable for most stuff (as per the networking
workflow), and other subsystems that seem to never want to cc: stable
for various reasons (offenders not mentioned to be nice...)

So let's bump that number up a bit, maybe you are missing 100 patches
this past year that should have been backported?

Feels like you all could tag more, even if the number is only 40-50 :)

Oh wait, are you sure you don't count the horrid "double commits" where
you backport something from your development branch to your "for linus"
branch, and have cc: stable on both, so that during the -rc1 merge
window I see a ton of commits that are already in the tree?  That would
inflate your numbers a lot more so your real percentages might be a lot
lower...

fun with math.

greg k-h

  reply	other threads:[~2020-08-08 11:28 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-08-07 13:30 WTF: patch "[PATCH] drm/mgag200: Remove declaration of mgag200_mmap() from header" was seriously submitted to be applied to the 5.8-stable tree? gregkh
2020-08-07 13:53 ` Thomas Zimmermann
2020-08-08  9:13   ` Daniel Vetter
2020-08-08  9:13     ` Daniel Vetter
2020-08-08  9:37     ` Sam Ravnborg
2020-08-08  9:37       ` Sam Ravnborg
2020-08-10  8:20       ` Jani Nikula
2020-08-10  8:20         ` Jani Nikula
2020-08-08 10:25     ` Greg KH
2020-08-08 10:25       ` Greg KH
2020-08-08 11:02       ` Daniel Vetter
2020-08-08 11:02         ` Daniel Vetter
2020-08-08 11:29         ` Greg KH [this message]
2020-08-08 11:29           ` Greg KH
2020-08-08 15:24           ` Daniel Vetter
2020-08-08 15:24             ` Daniel Vetter
2020-08-10 12:49             ` Daniel Vetter
2020-08-10 12:49               ` Daniel Vetter
2020-08-11 14:14               ` Vivi, Rodrigo
2020-08-11 14:14                 ` Vivi, Rodrigo
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2020-08-20  8:33 gregkh

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20200808112908.GA3063898@kroah.com \
    --to=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=airlied@redhat.com \
    --cc=alexander.deucher@amd.com \
    --cc=armijn@tjaldur.nl \
    --cc=daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch \
    --cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=emil.velikov@collabora.com \
    --cc=kraxel@redhat.com \
    --cc=krzk@kernel.org \
    --cc=sam@ravnborg.org \
    --cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=tzimmermann@suse.de \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.