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 vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8995EE14AD for ; Wed, 6 Sep 2023 15:47:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S242322AbjIFPrs (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Sep 2023 11:47:48 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:54302 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S241998AbjIFPrr (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Sep 2023 11:47:47 -0400 Received: from smtp-out2.suse.de (smtp-out2.suse.de [IPv6:2001:67c:2178:6::1d]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 68302BC for ; Wed, 6 Sep 2023 08:47:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-out2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 256E61F459; Wed, 6 Sep 2023 15:47:41 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_rsa; t=1694015261; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=qj1gFrvpz5RAlpnr1VkZDQG1eu7qusQyo0s8dsojMq4=; b=YmEquC39gN2uQLSob8ydJT127tTClbbEJN0IWPJp1XGdNuX9S4IdwuB/afADupGVp6m6cF s/N773PmkTI0KgxmQayVz1GRi6otOpsE/pfsGA6gEtFTS1K2kWQ92ef0U6MXO+IcKdIyOE 4W/mxg+WiIn5IQqYiQh5Qvybdv7lQa8= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1694015261; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=qj1gFrvpz5RAlpnr1VkZDQG1eu7qusQyo0s8dsojMq4=; b=Jt6sU5HsZLheJoPju9Inywwf3tKbvFVVXgrr+hxsJ8FMkrNxW2nZtfaq8rXJZuxTW/419v sqTR0k9kNt7ohRAg== Received: from imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EA63D1333E; Wed, 6 Sep 2023 15:47:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dovecot-director2.suse.de ([192.168.254.65]) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de with ESMTPSA id EyiVNxyf+GQ9bAAAMHmgww (envelope-from ); Wed, 06 Sep 2023 15:47:40 +0000 Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2023 17:47:39 +0200 From: Jean Delvare To: Andi Shyti Cc: Heiner Kallweit , Wolfram Sang , linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] i2c: i801: fix cleanup code in remove() and error path of probe() Message-ID: <20230906174739.499ab821@endymion.delvare> In-Reply-To: <20230906141357.nudcljmbflv32esx@zenone.zhora.eu> References: <3d5143c3-9a6c-2107-62e4-5f328ce7ea26@gmail.com> <20230906134745.24dfa076@endymion.delvare> <20230906141357.nudcljmbflv32esx@zenone.zhora.eu> Organization: SUSE Linux X-Mailer: Claws Mail 4.0.0 (GTK+ 3.24.34; x86_64-suse-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org Hi Andi, On Wed, 6 Sep 2023 16:13:57 +0200, Andi Shyti wrote: > On Wed, Sep 06, 2023 at 01:47:45PM +0200, Jean Delvare wrote: > > On Sat, 02 Sep 2023 22:06:14 +0200, Heiner Kallweit wrote: > > > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org > > > > I wouldn't cc stable. For one thing, this patch doesn't fix a bug that > > actually bothers people. Error paths are rarely taken, and driver > > removal isn't that frequent either. Consequences are also rather > > harmless (one-time resource leak, race condition which is quite > > unlikely to trigger). > > we are having this same discussion in another thread: if a bug is > unlikely to happen, doesn't mean that there is no bug. A fix is a > fix and should be backported to stable kernels. No. Please read: https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/stable-kernel-rules.html There is clearly a list of conditions for a commit to be eligible for stable kernel trees. It's not "every fix". > Sometimes bugs are reported some other times bugs are discovered > by reading the code (like in the other thread). In the latter > case bugs are just waiting for their time of glory. I'm not saying otherwise. But that's clearly one of the factor to decide whether a fix should go to stable. A bug which has been reported by a user who is affected by it is clearly a better candidate to backport. The other factor is how bad things are if the bug happens. I fully agree that a bug which is found by code review but would have dramatic consequences should also have its fix backported to stable kernel trees, even if it never happened before and is unlikely to happen in the future. My point is that the bugs being discussed here do not match any of these criteria. They have not been reported, they most likely never happened, they most likely never will, and if they would, consequences would be pretty benign. -- Jean Delvare SUSE L3 Support