From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2778EC369D1 for ; Fri, 25 Apr 2025 10:07:27 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post: List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:References: Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: List-Owner; bh=ZkvBQCaxhq2atxNWiI173wEOk2znTVgS/BrvPh20YWc=; b=btvJOz8GcPVEhG sgBMDAuJnSSY6b6pgzUsUxUxyMxMh/x/nVgBqy6LvelLAPrNLm+JAKrzqxSOcGdWcOQzb70PxyM9b H5kKsXtjd45en2Is//1uNaFJavixquU8sk4v2cXqRLjfdz2gKurH7+M0Z1vPjcY/OhgAeGc+WNZYA +nQ1LSF9mMdmGtICGx5YtI4YptXKW0Cqpwyj+cMA/5ujm+cA2nsxlD+mi+CQ7IJHFm8WbOofHKrBr MgxhgN04BN++HLBqTj8KLtocKW2+qQYjXPpeXZO58PHURPxF2PcQQRQcGT8hQi0W3RY1kNW/aVBxI u1u3uYHS17WTxgV3YgnA==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.98.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1u8Fxn-0000000GewV-1ylZ; Fri, 25 Apr 2025 10:07:19 +0000 Received: from mail-wr1-x42a.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::42a]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.98.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1u8Ewp-0000000GSsS-0PTW for linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org; Fri, 25 Apr 2025 09:02:16 +0000 Received: by mail-wr1-x42a.google.com with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-39ac8e7688aso1112241f8f.2 for ; Fri, 25 Apr 2025 02:02:14 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.com; s=google; t=1745571734; x=1746176534; darn=lists.infradead.org; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=CUtCax9Xz79pqocOKSO+PWNehk8nJoFSaWWNyZR+sqk=; b=Ip81aRvU3xF8AqqeNLaNfT4bun8mDGteqgjiG/JYVhRjLExizkdtPbMqxSx8wP1JKZ u742Uy8YuRwbSrlQRv4G96SSnxVguk+SApc7kYAtD8SHIjFh6Z2M+LZMBq9/255VUptP zv8B0QZa1Mx1KfxeCMWjDvFN0vssS2GT+X4P7mrJF6VpLXFOkPeoT/+nkYQlYUR+LriG FLDCNUT8Fv8qCpXsjIMlXzv4WDsZV+G8V2FDRGGuZPY1KFpOeO9NjpJnpkMVdpi0m/gY pQ8dAWVggs/zud1vhFktzF7rdLpFchKpv4X3baz83upSkFMf57lP8AWJcHTZ7OhtxEW/ Q6Rw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1745571734; x=1746176534; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=CUtCax9Xz79pqocOKSO+PWNehk8nJoFSaWWNyZR+sqk=; b=L68ifVTxMYo7cg52dI9XKAZLGPX4CuR5ynuE6TwfuPymHZ9G+dFe4N0wmVcFuci6dR sExstiNewT7aZuuQHA9AMVUxtzVrrNFoFeY5StiBNzsM88Rj2y4Q1SArlubZrspvXPfN aAjiIhkCiSqlBEy3zK66wXG3vTgU+/OhcGEVtIj3Wadiml8p0m5rUCU/nHKz75NCYysm Y7n6kZ5lIs7GU2D6M7/H7aKQ3647glUAVlAfDlHz1kKlJv+1mjcV0h44nM/ckw16UJoU vUBrJi49J1OSN0vMHkc4/4jOtkUJINpDzAy98TNlDx3jWksXIPBAA57RNuOxUGSTIUVP OAdw== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCWcr3wUUN3m3h4HcasXYHf52yruFrosp4GoxGcYesX8Juuo/GGQDBZqrrKGUorrHIokmMUJs4Jn10/l9Q==@lists.infradead.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yzmn69PDgUIKpuKbBo6y5+0PxIGcQsR/uQSVNpoZJPEGiGur0Fi uoS4B5eH0l0RSBDMRs3wLM2FURLBmZGdYGK9yr9gLsJ0GPZn9yvyTQCQv6l5VV6nuzItDDsoEES U X-Gm-Gg: ASbGnct3r28lTCBw4gTkIvdar80iMmepLN+3t/WmoroazMamf61q/xviiypxbSppW7e yh+Y/BS0Gjwfi1WlWGvC/wmy+SoUPOHyJU41GbqmAANHjsAjrhcu+E6xYbn5gGiQxr0sPj7CG1f 9aDB/AV6cDXkkjcRRT2bMx88hchnOAqMGSww+8IJ3wMa9rSZTbME2EGk97wmyQd9XaltNJODlBy 71ctIxvXgioNGJhnqxW0X1y0lMRCCtGtVpV7CSEUhBcg8DV+alUjLC3KKhluAUNrRx2GKo1UNOW nuCzon4otiUfDYKhWpoa6lUvSnwoJpbulEKXs7dyFJU= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHcaRb5pcjKTG+Y5h3Ih/yrwWqsjNfb1VbBSCFlmYmzhEmDkPcseYoWUd0DAhovc+dqSuA5vA== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6000:2505:b0:391:412b:e23f with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-3a074e1a1bfmr1145277f8f.15.1745571733688; Fri, 25 Apr 2025 02:02:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pathway.suse.cz ([176.114.240.130]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id ffacd0b85a97d-3a073ca4f88sm1689934f8f.29.2025.04.25.02.02.12 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 25 Apr 2025 02:02:13 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2025 11:02:11 +0200 From: Petr Mladek To: Greg KH Cc: Vlastimil Babka , Ryo Takakura , alex@ghiti.fr, aou@eecs.berkeley.edu, bigeasy@linutronix.de, conor.dooley@microchip.com, jirislaby@kernel.org, john.ogness@linutronix.de, palmer@dabbelt.com, paul.walmsley@sifive.com, samuel.holland@sifive.com, u.kleine-koenig@baylibre.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-serial@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] serial: sifive: lock port in startup()/shutdown() callbacks Message-ID: References: <20250405043833.397020-1-ryotkkr98@gmail.com> <20250405044338.397237-1-ryotkkr98@gmail.com> <2025040553-video-declared-7d54@gregkh> <397723b7-9f04-4cb1-b718-2396ea9d1b91@suse.cz> <2025042202-compare-entrap-0089@gregkh> <2025042252-geology-causation-a455@gregkh> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <2025042252-geology-causation-a455@gregkh> X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20250425_020215_134003_6937B5ED X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 41.23 ) X-BeenThere: linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-riscv" Errors-To: linux-riscv-bounces+linux-riscv=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Tue 2025-04-22 15:16:21, Greg KH wrote: > On Tue, Apr 22, 2025 at 03:07:54PM +0200, Vlastimil Babka wrote: > > On 4/22/25 12:50, Greg KH wrote: > > > On Tue, Apr 22, 2025 at 12:20:42PM +0200, Vlastimil Babka wrote: > > >> > > >> I admit it's surprising to see such a request as AFAIK it's normally done to > > >> mix stable fixes and new features in the same series (especially when the > > >> patches depend on each other), and ordering the fixes first and marking only > > >> them as stable should be sufficient. We do that all the time in -mm. I > > >> thought that stable works with stable marked commits primarily, not series? > > > > > > Yes, but when picking which "branch" to apply a series to, what would > > > you do if you have some "fix some bugs, then add some new features" in a > > > single patch series? The one to go to -final or the one for the next > > > -rc1? > > > > As a maintainer I could split it myself. > > You must not have that many patches to review, remember, some of us get > a few more than others ;) > > > > I see a lot of bugfixes delayed until -rc1 because of this issue, and > > > it's really not a good idea at all. > > > > In my experience, most of the time these fixes are created because a dev: > > > > - works on the code to implement the feature part > > - while working at the code, spots an existing bug > > - the bug can be old (Fixes: commit a number of releases ago) > > - wants to be helpful so isolates the fix separately as an early patch of > > the series and marks stable because the bug can be serious enough in theory > > - at the same time there are no known reports of the bug being hit in the wild > > > > In that case I don't see the urgency to fix it ASAP (unless it's e.g. > > something obviously dangerously exploitable) so it might not be such a bad > > idea just to put everything towards next rc1. > > Yes, but then look at the huge number of "bugfixes" that land in -rc1. > Is that ok or not? I don't know... > > > This very thread seems to be a good example of the above. I see the later > > version added a > > Fixes: 45c054d0815b ("tty: serial: add driver for the SiFive UART") > > which is a v5.2 commit. > > Agreed, but delaying a known-fix for weeks/months feels bad to me. I personally push rc1 regression fixes ASAP. But it has a cost. I do extra careful review, testing, and still I am nervous of causing a regression which might leak to a stable release. IMHO, it is perfectly fine to delay fixes for bugs which were there for months or years. For example, this patch fixes a bug which has been in the driver since the beginning (2019). I think that the root of the problem is in the view of the stable release process. I am pretty conservative. My experience is that some problems are caught only in the -rc phase when the kernel gets more testing. I am not sure if stable -rc kernels get the same amount of testing. Best Regards, Petr _______________________________________________ linux-riscv mailing list linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-wr1-f44.google.com (mail-wr1-f44.google.com [209.85.221.44]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7030B1B6D11 for ; Fri, 25 Apr 2025 09:02:15 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.221.44 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1745571737; cv=none; b=a+IcViOg0cfu0z2LuFnhUTGDppxCax7JBVrghm2Xdm0bZXr/4rjdjZgVTQkelsvGSn+Omyo7xqmqrMRrFb8PCBiSjjcH/w2LIX7umWvTFsuDYH2YdumcqW320aaam5TxRKbjr2iq0MTKqG4aT3jTvXaJlL9EJ52+HEVM+lu8ImY= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1745571737; c=relaxed/simple; bh=cigjLGVrA/i3iKo0ZUO3ckDz+7QoGQ7Izg/Jz2mNid8=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=bOCH7YP8AIZbKWQ5O0m0ExWL0haL3C10qFnPV+95sbQbNhHhE9tJJPXnq571W1ERBKzmS7vBh01mX+H8Vx08gTejnP61W69LwAbhrDGPf9Ls8GusZQXZIK3UNW/ygxFfCUlMstSgt/qcEFEhciL52tk7pN/5d6q+dAIrBGXejLE= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=suse.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=suse.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=suse.com header.i=@suse.com header.b=PJDrg37I; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.221.44 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=suse.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=suse.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=suse.com header.i=@suse.com header.b="PJDrg37I" Received: by mail-wr1-f44.google.com with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-39ee5a5bb66so1181578f8f.3 for ; Fri, 25 Apr 2025 02:02:15 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.com; s=google; t=1745571734; x=1746176534; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=CUtCax9Xz79pqocOKSO+PWNehk8nJoFSaWWNyZR+sqk=; b=PJDrg37ILkoHM0ANI0DtAkyi22HhLrHmRsQ1VyWmcUofSoVWr0ITZheUjp1G3rpFS2 Cl8ieJIdiRaTgQCbkVDYym7kB9xoc+LOeJFK38uYr4j5tDWKNLcgK185TSV17ujU73rU z9Zv1UaE754RO2I9g33UsVZZ3WIk6rDGclbz7jt86Sruxq7uWj4H+qWPgv0XEG92frNz JvfIxmeglBUBchdhZ++45OSeL/iqdatSdIzjZBW/AxPSaANrbzRkJnPS9A2RUqReBMYg BCBMrm2PZw8en8NpXKlQM2eg8nBA57AWtdBGkOQ3Pk0j6qm/BKyrAW17bvn+9NUgxdfL KY9A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1745571734; x=1746176534; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=CUtCax9Xz79pqocOKSO+PWNehk8nJoFSaWWNyZR+sqk=; b=N6EkeSqJqZDAhBKS4tvv7AlPE5gdSFHvhj+i2sJ543hsSb2xMIR+BmIjW32fQ9eMlx kGuBm/UonjH1bucd4Tk3H7dXuPAeBi4wMJQXgDi1k6R7tPjHV29ltOGyJ9EvI0cv/84B GG8NSWR/4Q+F2O49Yps5tCBOav0I4/3anUWQ3caNmrT8KEkmdGRgIUxVGIUrhZs+ghbf meWbaKR15cWQxSd0U/y18LwgtMRtHBdj6e6d1lrzIi4jwNaP20p2NSxJnCCxGcXB94+G EY5UztPkfeafqfLAKPfF9/ogPto4/lYGQqDs3+U0g+hd7n7gmat61tm+MS3ylMPEmGNW CQKw== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCU9lukR3lGvjKwSY08fJIRAiLIJSeRqt1EeiqH+oJRt+ktJOgegeOgzmjgNrdjLLIr/tgjve/eoddK6nBs=@vger.kernel.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YxkMqQxgvq07Emc4vribt6STjGkvpwXURRqUK92lqjKPG9EfgW9 cCgJq3cpI8bGH2GDr3LQtQincSMHBLz5IjZh6CxcI5asrwnpNL2EjE4c5IlJiyw= X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncuen7t84vjt5rFDRTU7uVB0qGhhEjBqTovODWJdQW5CzriAMSM2fVZUjO3XVDg fo4b+PZ+yCg5EZS/tDL8kg5L9vVY8YdpU+78kf8a2oT7TJ91jeo84UzqFzZ6P74Ay8Fo7h3EDc0 hfTQadQlm6onEa4bNho5Gi1X9/C3ztiv3gA1NMTELE5HS2cpy7NB/VgmgNQUJV5HSi5RcgjSibp nh8jQK/X27/gL1xVBLCHTTwuFSvlSNjrwzB3sMsqbErmEDWe0imZMY9L9tec6F9qT/O9rs5aJv3 MtobgvjOUfNoPUK7RTlsCAXcXJloKDvRMTudJgaN81w= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHcaRb5pcjKTG+Y5h3Ih/yrwWqsjNfb1VbBSCFlmYmzhEmDkPcseYoWUd0DAhovc+dqSuA5vA== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6000:2505:b0:391:412b:e23f with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-3a074e1a1bfmr1145277f8f.15.1745571733688; Fri, 25 Apr 2025 02:02:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pathway.suse.cz ([176.114.240.130]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id ffacd0b85a97d-3a073ca4f88sm1689934f8f.29.2025.04.25.02.02.12 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 25 Apr 2025 02:02:13 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2025 11:02:11 +0200 From: Petr Mladek To: Greg KH Cc: Vlastimil Babka , Ryo Takakura , alex@ghiti.fr, aou@eecs.berkeley.edu, bigeasy@linutronix.de, conor.dooley@microchip.com, jirislaby@kernel.org, john.ogness@linutronix.de, palmer@dabbelt.com, paul.walmsley@sifive.com, samuel.holland@sifive.com, u.kleine-koenig@baylibre.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-serial@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] serial: sifive: lock port in startup()/shutdown() callbacks Message-ID: References: <20250405043833.397020-1-ryotkkr98@gmail.com> <20250405044338.397237-1-ryotkkr98@gmail.com> <2025040553-video-declared-7d54@gregkh> <397723b7-9f04-4cb1-b718-2396ea9d1b91@suse.cz> <2025042202-compare-entrap-0089@gregkh> <2025042252-geology-causation-a455@gregkh> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-serial@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <2025042252-geology-causation-a455@gregkh> On Tue 2025-04-22 15:16:21, Greg KH wrote: > On Tue, Apr 22, 2025 at 03:07:54PM +0200, Vlastimil Babka wrote: > > On 4/22/25 12:50, Greg KH wrote: > > > On Tue, Apr 22, 2025 at 12:20:42PM +0200, Vlastimil Babka wrote: > > >> > > >> I admit it's surprising to see such a request as AFAIK it's normally done to > > >> mix stable fixes and new features in the same series (especially when the > > >> patches depend on each other), and ordering the fixes first and marking only > > >> them as stable should be sufficient. We do that all the time in -mm. I > > >> thought that stable works with stable marked commits primarily, not series? > > > > > > Yes, but when picking which "branch" to apply a series to, what would > > > you do if you have some "fix some bugs, then add some new features" in a > > > single patch series? The one to go to -final or the one for the next > > > -rc1? > > > > As a maintainer I could split it myself. > > You must not have that many patches to review, remember, some of us get > a few more than others ;) > > > > I see a lot of bugfixes delayed until -rc1 because of this issue, and > > > it's really not a good idea at all. > > > > In my experience, most of the time these fixes are created because a dev: > > > > - works on the code to implement the feature part > > - while working at the code, spots an existing bug > > - the bug can be old (Fixes: commit a number of releases ago) > > - wants to be helpful so isolates the fix separately as an early patch of > > the series and marks stable because the bug can be serious enough in theory > > - at the same time there are no known reports of the bug being hit in the wild > > > > In that case I don't see the urgency to fix it ASAP (unless it's e.g. > > something obviously dangerously exploitable) so it might not be such a bad > > idea just to put everything towards next rc1. > > Yes, but then look at the huge number of "bugfixes" that land in -rc1. > Is that ok or not? I don't know... > > > This very thread seems to be a good example of the above. I see the later > > version added a > > Fixes: 45c054d0815b ("tty: serial: add driver for the SiFive UART") > > which is a v5.2 commit. > > Agreed, but delaying a known-fix for weeks/months feels bad to me. I personally push rc1 regression fixes ASAP. But it has a cost. I do extra careful review, testing, and still I am nervous of causing a regression which might leak to a stable release. IMHO, it is perfectly fine to delay fixes for bugs which were there for months or years. For example, this patch fixes a bug which has been in the driver since the beginning (2019). I think that the root of the problem is in the view of the stable release process. I am pretty conservative. My experience is that some problems are caught only in the -rc phase when the kernel gets more testing. I am not sure if stable -rc kernels get the same amount of testing. Best Regards, Petr