Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965372Ab3GLUT6 (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Jul 2013 16:19:58 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:3088 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965283Ab3GLUT4 (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Jul 2013 16:19:56 -0400 Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2013 16:19:39 -0400 From: Dave Jones To: Steven Rostedt Cc: "Theodore Ts'o" , Guenter Roeck , Linus Torvalds , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Andrew Morton , stable Subject: Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review Message-ID: <20130712201939.GB15261@redhat.com> Mail-Followup-To: Dave Jones , Steven Rostedt , Theodore Ts'o , Guenter Roeck , Linus Torvalds , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Andrew Morton , stable References: <20130711214830.611455274@linuxfoundation.org> <20130711222935.GA11340@redhat.com> <20130711224455.GA17222@kroah.com> <20130712141530.GA3629@roeck-us.net> <20130712173150.GA5534@roeck-us.net> <20130712181103.GA6689@roeck-us.net> <20130712193557.GB342@thunk.org> <1373658551.17876.117.camel@gandalf.local.home> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1373658551.17876.117.camel@gandalf.local.home> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1937 Lines: 37 On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 03:49:11PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Fri, 2013-07-12 at 15:35 -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > > > So the problem is that maintainers are lazy. They don't want to go > > back for bug fixes that have "proven" themselves, and even if they > > aren't critical bug fixes, they are things which a distro maintainer > > or a stable kernel user might want (and sometimes stable uers are > > uppity enough to expect subsystem maintainers to do this back > > porting). So subsystem maintainers then react by marking submits for > > stable even though they really should soak for a release or two before > > submitting them, since by marking them as submit, the commit gets > > pushed to stable automatically --- albeit early. > > Actually, this is a very good point. There were one or two stable > patches I had pushed to linux-next that I wasn't too comfortable about. > If the fix goes back to older trees, I rather have them stirring in > linux-next and push it in the next merge window instead of pushing it to > Linus and have it go to stable immediately. > > Unless its a obvious fix, I tend to take about a month from the time I > get a stable fix to the time I push it out. Making sure the stable fix > doesn't introduce new bugs. Like most of the other examples in this thread, one size doesn't fit all though. Your example above: If that fix was for "tracing reports wrong results", no big deal, everyone can live with it for a month. If it was fixing "a bug in tracing can allow an unprivileged user to crash the kernel", a month is unacceptable, and at the least we should be getting an interim fix to mitigate the problem. Dave -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/