Re: [MAINTAINERS SUMMIT] [2/4] Ensure recent mainline regression are fixed in latest stable series

Rafael J. Wysocki
2024-06-14T14:32:43Z

On Fri, Jun 14, 2024 at 4:01 PM Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jun 13, 2024 at 10:32:27AM +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>
> > I propose we extend the implications of the "no regressions" rule so
> > that mainline developers must ensure fixes for recent mainline
> > regression make it to the latest stable series.
>
> I do note that there is already a bunch of disquiet about what makes it
> into stable...
>
> > """Developers must ensure that fixes for regressions introduced in the
> > last development cycle make it to the latest stable series -- typically
> > by adding 'Fixes:' and 'CC: <stable…' tags to the patch description's
> > footer."""
>
> Personally I stopped bothering with manually Ccing stable because the
> stable team already picks up much more than I'm comfortable with,
> devoting any effort to thinking about what might go to stable just
> doesn't seem like a good use of time.

Same here mostly except for 3 cases:

- When I want to limit the scope of the backports.
- When I want the patch to get into "stable" earlier than autosel
would pick it up.
- When there are dependencies I want "stable" to know about.

> We also already have problems with people spamming fixes tags onto
> things that are not really bugs or where not much effort appears to have
> gone into identifying a relevant commit, I think some people have
> internal process pressures on having Fixes tags for the sake of it.
> Demanding that people who don't really care fill in the blank to appease
> some workflow strategist doesn't seem likely to improve the quality of
> information provided any.

+1