Re: 5.13.2-rc and others have many not for stable

[Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>]

On Wed, Jul 14, 2021 at 09:52:58AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
>On Tue 13-07-21 18:28:13, Andrew Morton wrote:
>> At present this -stable
>> promiscuity is overriding the (sometime carefully) considered decisions
>> of the MM developers, and that's a bit scary.
>
>Not only scary, it is also a waste of precious time of those who
>carefuly evaluate stable tree backports.

I'm just as concerned with the other direction: we end up missing quite
a lot of patches that are needed in practice, and no one is circling
back to make sure that we have everything we need.

I took a peek at SUSE's tree to see how things work there, and looking
at the very latest mm/ commit:

commit c8c7b321edcf7a7e8c22dc66e0366f72aa2390f0
Author: Michal Koutný <mkoutny@suse.com>
Date:   Tue May 4 11:12:10 2021 +0200

     mm: memcontrol: fix cpuhotplug statistics flushing
     (bsc#1185606).
     
     suse-commit: 3bba386a33fac144abf2507554cb21552acb16af

This seems to be commit a3d4c05a4474 ("mm: memcontrol: fix cpuhotplug
statistics flushing") upstream, and I assume that it was picked because
it fixed a real bug someone cares about.

I can maybe understand that at the time that the patch was
written/committed it didn't seem like stable@ material and thus there
was no cc to stable.

But once someone realized it needs to be backported, why weren't we told
to take it into stable too?

-- 
Thanks,
Sasha