Upstream hash format in commit messages; was: Re: [cip-dev] Request for reviews for 4.4-st42, 4.4-cip77

[Ulrich Hecht <uli@fpond.eu>]

> On 07/10/2023 6:47 PM CEST Ulrich Hecht <uli@fpond.eu> wrote:
> > On 07/09/2023 9:50 PM CEST Pavel Machek <pavel@denx.de> wrote:
> > a| 61256d2d6 None o+ | netfilter: nft_dynset: do not reject set updates with NFT_SET_EVAL
> > 
> > Usual marking is "Commit xxx upstream.", this one has [ xxx ].
> 
> That's how the commits come in from stable. Are we using that in an automated way anywhere? If not, I'd rather not spend time fixing stuff like that.

[For those playing along: Off-list discussion revealed that there are indeed automated ways in which these things are used, so we need to fix them in some way.]

I have come across the following variations in the previous and the next release:

[ Upstream commit {hash} ]
commit {hash} upstream.
Upstream commit: {hash}
[ {hash} ]
(cherry picked from upstream {hash})
(backported from upstream {hash})

Which one of those work, and which need to be fixed up?

CU
Uli