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 EC9BF27702D; Mon, 6 Apr 2026 17:08:03 +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=1775495284; cv=none; b=KKdl0If+G/1hgiU5OmR8sUG6qk4Pgbc20GDkcCgNSvRFSBNnSEDbxlFxeXB/ZyXb+T8fZroAQnRpu3T8jhH3kt5kMuBGHZHV+1NjuZh9X50yEgt05GMfuPWGm9X8CZ4uMrMjtzFYM4ez2WecAIqVckoZ/hBTUxf92gR7PYJCQkw= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1775495284; c=relaxed/simple; bh=ID6PaLEDd+oZUUzH34AVPseNbr3AqOulchf/FdRxKfk=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=eFF5nLhb71B3ecQs4oKqwjbcHYvRAANK2mAuBbmQH7u0GEVtcWQcv18bHcyMqtwnrs/7jJ6EkACRJ+bzc39IF7PTzDAlKdzL3ye+MAsjXcUxfDXoYX95r8UWeH7sliYTES9pedSJoA5HS5ncxrrmRLe0gdrF8FuXlTdgRq48QVE= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=TpxPzsWG; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="TpxPzsWG" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 58E13C4CEF7; Mon, 6 Apr 2026 17:08:03 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1775495283; bh=ID6PaLEDd+oZUUzH34AVPseNbr3AqOulchf/FdRxKfk=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=TpxPzsWGafj2AH8ssKC3kNkbvp982AYEfoDnFlhXPUJn53E/wNDrtOa3RO6kjg1tw BornPcTwg+oOQWHvQ0HgIzuuKz1rxjSXcoTigkZvXyBZ4FtqMs68F9mjhnWqgFrag/ YzlpBPNtbwrlU/Fp7Qcz1VnF+HhciQoGuLMBwm8QkLVt88vP6qv/oFpJbrFuiG1Pzq ptdvxJzimzFs1ANpykQzUhFRqDp+ro0c9wBPoaC23j/jFif9rzDBBw7W1akrsHwVud PiJon3zBw5ZZDw4wel33fM1S8K2j8gcVBqMIbzUGIQEhNkHpxfhXLeneXoIZSARdJf hwr9ERTEURhuw== Date: Mon, 6 Apr 2026 13:08:02 -0400 From: Sasha Levin To: Harshit Mogalapalli Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman , stable@vger.kernel.org, patches@lists.linux.dev, Niklas Cassel , Bjorn Helgaas , Krzysztof =?utf-8?Q?Wilczy=C5=84ski?= , Vegard Nossum Subject: Re: [PATCH 6.12 044/265] PCI: dw-rockchip: Dont wait for link since we can detect Link Up Message-ID: References: <20260312201018.128816016@linuxfoundation.org> <20260312201019.793655649@linuxfoundation.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: stable@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Mon, Apr 06, 2026 at 09:28:54PM +0530, Harshit Mogalapalli wrote: >Hi Sasha, > > >On 06/04/26 21:13, Sasha Levin wrote: >>> >>>We need a process improvement here. >>> >>>We are pulling in a broken commit as a stable-dep, so we can revert it. >>> >>>Patch 45 is the revert, same logic for pair (46 and 47) >>> >>>[PATCH 6.12 046/265] PCI: qcom: Dont wait for link if we can >>>detect Link Up >>>[PATCH 6.12 047/265] Revert "PCI: qcom: Dont wait for link if we >>>can detect Link Up" >> >>This works in our favor: it helps us answer the future question of >>"why wasn't >>this commit backported", and has absolutely no effect on the actual >>codebase. > >I agree this has no effect, but couldn't we just say, the reason we >never backported it because we never have the broken commit(vulnerable >commit) backported ? That's the correct response we should give, yes, but the question is how do we store this information in a way that is easily accessible to us later without having to dig through the tree. -- Thanks, Sasha