Re: [PATCH 6.1 0/3] net: add sysctl accept_ra_min_lft

[Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>]

On Fri, Oct 06, 2023 at 12:40:36PM -0700, Maciej Żenczykowski wrote:
> > >> > > Was this rejected?
> > >> > > Any resolution on this (ACK or NAK) would be useful. Thanks!
> > >> >
> > >> > They are in our "to get to" queue, which is very long still due to
> > >> > multiple conferences and travel.
> > >> >
> > >> > But I will note, you didn't put the git id of the patches in the patches
> > >> > themselves, so it will take me extra work to add them there when
> > >> > applying.
> > >> >
> > >> > Also, why just 6.1?  What about newer stable kernels?  You can't update
> > >> > and have a regression, right?
> > >>
> > >> Note, because of this, we can not take these patches now at all anyway :(
> > >
> > >Because without any knowledge of whether these patches would even be
> > >accepted into stable, or whether they would need to go in via ACK,
> > >preparing them for more trees seemed like pointless busywork...
> >
> > FWIW, the above just means that we get to do the busywork rather than
> > the submitter...
> 
> We're certainly willing to do the work, but we're not entirely sure
> what you want,
> and whether you will indeed even accept these patches...
> We're just trying to be mindful of everyone's time...
> 
> For example as a reviewer myself I know that in many cases it is
> simply easier to do the
> clean (!) cherrypick yourself (you presumably have scripts that
> automate the entire thing),
> rather than try to verify that someone else's cherrypick is actually
> indeed clean.
> 
> These patches cleanly cherry pick, build, and pass our tests on
> current 6.5 and 6.1 LTS.
> 
> git checkout remotes/linux-stable/v6.5.6 && git cherry-pick
> 1671bcfd76fdc0b9e65153cf759153083755fe4c && git cherry-pick
> 5027d54a9c30bc7ec808360378e2b4753f053f25 && git cherry-pick
> 5cb249686e67dbef3ffe53887fa725eefc5a7144  && run_uml_ack_net_test
> 
> (and same thing with 6.1.56)
> 
> Do you simply want the upstream sha1s?

For things that cherry-pick cleanly, yes, that's easiest.

> Or do you want us to follow up with patches?

For kernels that cherry-picking does not apply cleanly, yes.

thanks,

greg k-h