Re: [PATCH] mtd: spi-nor: include mtd.h header for struct mtd_info definition

Re: [PATCH] mtd: spi-nor: include mtd.h header for struct mtd_info definition

[Brian Norris]

On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 10:25:55AM +0100, Rafał Miłecki wrote:
> On 26 November 2015 at 09:05, Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@gmail.com> wrote:
> > So far struct spi_nor was using just a pointer to struct mtd_info so it
> > wasn't needed to have it fully defined there. After recent change we
> > embed whole struct so we need to include a proper header.

Good catch.

> > Fixes: 1976367173a4 ("mtd: spi-nor: embed struct mtd_info within struct spi_nor")

I'm not 100% sure, but I thought I recall the -stable folks picking up
for-linus commits just based on the 'Fixes:' tags. I feel like that
isn't always ideal, though.

> > Signed-off-by: Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@gmail.com>
> 
> This may be worth taking as a fix for 4.4. However I'm not aware of
> any upstream driver failing to build because of this.

I don't see why it would need rushed out. All users of spi-nor.h
currently include mtd.h first. So there are no build failures because of
it.

Regards,
Brian

Re: [PATCH] mtd: spi-nor: include mtd.h header for struct mtd_info definition

[Rafał Miłecki]

On 27 November 2015 at 23:33, Brian Norris <computersforpeace@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 10:25:55AM +0100, Rafał Miłecki wrote:
>> On 26 November 2015 at 09:05, Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Fixes: 1976367173a4 ("mtd: spi-nor: embed struct mtd_info within struct spi_nor")
>
> I'm not 100% sure, but I thought I recall the -stable folks picking up
> for-linus commits just based on the 'Fixes:' tags. I feel like that
> isn't always ideal, though.

I'm confused. Do you mean I shouldn't include it?
Do you have a reference to more detailed Fixes usage? All I found is
info in Documentation/SubmittingPatches:
> If your patch fixes a bug in a specific commit, e.g. you found an issue using
> git-bisect, please use the 'Fixes:' tag
I think 'Fixes' usage is OK in this case.


>> > Signed-off-by: Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@gmail.com>
>>
>> This may be worth taking as a fix for 4.4. However I'm not aware of
>> any upstream driver failing to build because of this.
>
> I don't see why it would need rushed out. All users of spi-nor.h
> currently include mtd.h first. So there are no build failures because of
> it.

OK. It was just an OpenWrt out-of-tree driver that failed to compile.

-- 
Rafał

Re: [PATCH] mtd: spi-nor: include mtd.h header for struct mtd_info definition

[Brian Norris]

On Sat, Nov 28, 2015 at 03:05:26PM +0100, Rafał Miłecki wrote:
> On 27 November 2015 at 23:33, Brian Norris <computersforpeace@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 10:25:55AM +0100, Rafał Miłecki wrote:
> >> On 26 November 2015 at 09:05, Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > Fixes: 1976367173a4 ("mtd: spi-nor: embed struct mtd_info within struct spi_nor")
> >
> > I'm not 100% sure, but I thought I recall the -stable folks picking up
> > for-linus commits just based on the 'Fixes:' tags. I feel like that
> > isn't always ideal, though.
> 
> I'm confused. Do you mean I shouldn't include it?

No, the 'Fixes' usage is fine. I'm just not clear what importance is
placed on it by others.

> Do you have a reference to more detailed Fixes usage? All I found is
> info in Documentation/SubmittingPatches:
> > If your patch fixes a bug in a specific commit, e.g. you found an issue using
> > git-bisect, please use the 'Fixes:' tag
> I think 'Fixes' usage is OK in this case.

I don't have any better reference. Perhaps I'm completely mistaken, and
'Fixes' is never taken as the sole source of for-stable annotation.

Brian