From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B448218FDD6; Tue, 20 Aug 2024 14:00:39 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1724162439; cv=none; b=S4kddgxbvSCAO3cB6xDLzIXGm0axdPrfopRs+903/YZqVpEsYLz7Wv6jZIWpABZJ4cjBj/0Yxo8vXP1ELrKqsTMNAvbk74QSlafS7Kt4vLbgLNZlb6mPAP5gbQuVS5wVzRNU2KtaPC2y7HVhPqzB+/8tVYG0PMT+768ROv4yv0g= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1724162439; c=relaxed/simple; bh=obQu1LmcUROvlT2x7IIL7X01Sg/V8matNX00+XbROMI=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=Q56swVyXAFIx/RPJBi5duaEYyQ7xHXKFyere7QhrYkGOYttKYwBrekKfiIrySfOMiGgGo7LXHb69GZ9BoqZVZOFEfc5VY9jD7mytMav5X/Cc3HxgVB7S7EsI2N3KHKn+77nIYPe28qAFtncKuc2TNjLE2KLGY2XIdjEQWcwQVoA= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linuxfoundation.org header.i=@linuxfoundation.org header.b=XiOYFqhJ; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linuxfoundation.org header.i=@linuxfoundation.org header.b="XiOYFqhJ" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7E572C4AF0C; Tue, 20 Aug 2024 14:00:38 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=linuxfoundation.org; s=korg; t=1724162439; bh=obQu1LmcUROvlT2x7IIL7X01Sg/V8matNX00+XbROMI=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=XiOYFqhJmiDJBcIbQ9DmJXIatdqUO2M8GhnphpYLLOr85feum1/7SsWWbOHo6BAYI bVlb4umxlidJ32ehE9h4G/LyPFZxQVuRAIpfwgq4tv6lGrC57oM8WOMqp+fCYRBcua WYalzGK9HLMhDcfb9OYFlHbTKr8gZGKDzTCQKiHE= Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2024 22:00:35 +0800 From: Greg Kroah-Hartman To: Miao Wang Cc: Xi Ruoyao , Huacai Chen , loongarch@lists.linux.dev, Sasha Levin , stable@vger.kernel.org, WANG Xuerui , linux-api@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: It is correct to introduce new sys calls to stable versions? Message-ID: <2024082027-deskbound-rumbling-b96f@gregkh> References: <2024082057-coherence-lethargy-3513@gregkh> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-api@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: On Tue, Aug 20, 2024 at 09:49:59PM +0800, Miao Wang wrote: > Hi, > > > 2024年8月20日 21:36，Greg Kroah-Hartman 写道： > > > > On Tue, Aug 20, 2024 at 09:19:04PM +0800, Miao Wang wrote: > >> Hi, Greg > >> > >> I saw you have included commit 7697a0fe0154 ("LoongArch: Define > >> __ARCH_WANT_NEW_STAT in unistd.h") in your stable trees, which > >> actually introduced new sys calls newfstatat and fstat to Loongarch. > > > > See the documentation in that commit for why it was done. > > Thanks for your explanation. I totally understand the necessity of > re-introducing thees two syscalls. I just wonder whether there is any > limitation on what can be included in to the stable trees. If there > was no limitation, theoretically, I could also maintain a so-called > stable tree by applying all the patches from torvalds' tree, except > those that bumps the version number. Apparently such a "stable" tree > is far from stable. Or you could do the opposite, something that I have seen vendors do, and just bump the kernel version number to try to "claim" they updated their kernel to a more secure one (i.e. one that fixed loads of known issues), but they really didn't. Either way, it's your kernel, you are free to do whatever you want with it, have fun! :) greg k-h