On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 03:47:55PM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 01, 2010 at 08:53:32AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 10:38:31AM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> > > The issue is that applying individual patches like this is more
> > > "difficult" than just handling patches that are already marked in
> > > Linus's kernel tree as to be added to the stable queues. So it
> > > takes a bit more time and effort to get to those patches, while
> > > still keeping up with the series like you, and other developers,
> > > sent.
> >
> > Understood. Would providing a git tree to pull from for large series
> > like the XFS one make this easier for you in future? I can do that
> > bit of extra work if that makes things easier for you...
>
> No, patches are still easier, I would have to convert the git tree to
> patches anyway, so for now, this is fine.
I don't know for you, Greg, but one thing that I find time consuming
when merging fixes that I'm not backporting is to try to find the
commit ID of the equivalent mainline fix. And it's not specific to
the kernel, I also have the same issue with other projects.
For this reason, IMHO it helps when submitters can indicate in each
patch the mainline equivalent ID, or alternatively that it's pointless
to look for it because the fix is much different.
Just my 2 cents,
Willy
From: Willy Tarreau <[email protected]>
Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 06:40:48 +0200
> For this reason, IMHO it helps when submitters can indicate in each
> patch the mainline equivalent ID, or alternatively that it's pointless
> to look for it because the fix is much different.
I put this at the top of every networking/ide/sparc commit message
for -stable submissions I make.
In fact I thought that was a requirement for -stable submissions?
David Miller wrote:
> From: Willy Tarreau <[email protected]>
> Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 06:40:48 +0200
>
>> For this reason, IMHO it helps when submitters can indicate in each
>> patch the mainline equivalent ID, or alternatively that it's pointless
>> to look for it because the fix is much different.
>
> I put this at the top of every networking/ide/sparc commit message
> for -stable submissions I make.
>
> In fact I thought that was a requirement for -stable submissions?
It is a documented requirement, perhaps not very clearly worded in The
Submitter's Guide To Stable...
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commitdiff;h=46cdf871d9970b9252469531f9efd4a17243bb0b
--
Stefan Richter
-=====-==-=- -=-- ----=
http://arcgraph.de/sr/
On Thu, Apr 01, 2010 at 12:26:22AM -0700, David Miller wrote:
> From: Willy Tarreau <[email protected]>
> Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 06:40:48 +0200
>
> > For this reason, IMHO it helps when submitters can indicate in each
> > patch the mainline equivalent ID, or alternatively that it's pointless
> > to look for it because the fix is much different.
>
> I put this at the top of every networking/ide/sparc commit message
> for -stable submissions I make.
>
> In fact I thought that was a requirement for -stable submissions?
It is. Unfortunatly not everyone remembers it, and I have to go dig
through the git tree to find the commit ids, which slows down the
ability for their patches to get accepted.
The patches that include the git commit ids are trivial to get added to
the tree, almost no extra work on my part.
thanks,
greg k-h
On Thu, Apr 01, 2010 at 01:23:43PM +0200, Stefan Richter wrote:
> David Miller wrote:
> > From: Willy Tarreau <[email protected]>
> > Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 06:40:48 +0200
> >
> >> For this reason, IMHO it helps when submitters can indicate in each
> >> patch the mainline equivalent ID, or alternatively that it's pointless
> >> to look for it because the fix is much different.
> >
> > I put this at the top of every networking/ide/sparc commit message
> > for -stable submissions I make.
> >
> > In fact I thought that was a requirement for -stable submissions?
>
> It is a documented requirement, perhaps not very clearly worded in The
> Submitter's Guide To Stable...
> http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commitdiff;h=46cdf871d9970b9252469531f9efd4a17243bb0b
Patches always welcome to make that file easier to understand.
thanks,
greg k-h
It is a hard requirement to include the upstream commit ID in the
changelog of a -stable submission, not just a courtesy to the stable
team. This concerns only mail submission though, which is no longer
the only way into stable. (Also, fix a double "the".)
Signed-off-by: Stefan Richter <[email protected]>
---
Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt | 9 ++++-----
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
Index: b/Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt
===================================================================
--- a/Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt
+++ b/Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt
@@ -18,16 +18,15 @@ Rules on what kind of patches are accept
- It cannot contain any "trivial" fixes in it (spelling changes,
whitespace cleanups, etc).
- It must follow the Documentation/SubmittingPatches rules.
- - It or an equivalent fix must already exist in Linus' tree. Quote the
- respective commit ID in Linus' tree in your patch submission to -stable.
+ - It or an equivalent fix must already exist in Linus' tree (upstream).
Procedure for submitting patches to the -stable tree:
- Send the patch, after verifying that it follows the above rules, to
- [email protected].
- - To have the patch automatically included in the stable tree, add the
- the tag
+ [email protected]. You must note the upstream commit ID in the changelog
+ of your submission.
+ - To have the patch automatically included in the stable tree, add the tag
Cc: [email protected]
in the sign-off area. Once the patch is merged it will be applied to
the stable tree without anything else needing to be done by the author
--
Stefan Richter
-=====-==-=- -=-- ----=
http://arcgraph.de/sr/
On Thu, 1 Apr 2010 22:01:52 +0200 (CEST) Stefan Richter wrote:
> It is a hard requirement to include the upstream commit ID in the
> changelog of a -stable submission, not just a courtesy to the stable
> team. This concerns only mail submission though, which is no longer
> the only way into stable. (Also, fix a double "the".)
>
> Signed-off-by: Stefan Richter <[email protected]>
Looks good to me. Thanks.
Acked-by: Randy Dunlap <[email protected]>
> ---
> Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt | 9 ++++-----
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> Index: b/Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt
> ===================================================================
> --- a/Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt
> @@ -18,16 +18,15 @@ Rules on what kind of patches are accept
> - It cannot contain any "trivial" fixes in it (spelling changes,
> whitespace cleanups, etc).
> - It must follow the Documentation/SubmittingPatches rules.
> - - It or an equivalent fix must already exist in Linus' tree. Quote the
> - respective commit ID in Linus' tree in your patch submission to -stable.
> + - It or an equivalent fix must already exist in Linus' tree (upstream).
>
>
> Procedure for submitting patches to the -stable tree:
>
> - Send the patch, after verifying that it follows the above rules, to
> - [email protected].
> - - To have the patch automatically included in the stable tree, add the
> - the tag
> + [email protected]. You must note the upstream commit ID in the changelog
> + of your submission.
> + - To have the patch automatically included in the stable tree, add the tag
> Cc: [email protected]
> in the sign-off area. Once the patch is merged it will be applied to
> the stable tree without anything else needing to be done by the author
---
~Randy