Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Fri, 19 Feb 2021 11:37:45 +0100
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To:     Jari Ruusu <jariruusu@protonmail.com>
Cc:     Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>,
        Jari Ruusu <jariruusu@users.sourceforge.net>,
        Scott Branden <scott.branden@broadcom.com>,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        BCM Kernel Feedback <bcm-kernel-feedback-list@broadcom.com>
Subject: Re: 5.10 LTS Kernel: 2 or 6 years?
Message-ID: <YC+U+beaI91aXh5z@kroah.com>
References: <YA/E1bHRmZb50MlS@kroah.com>
 <YC4atKmK7ZqlOGER@kroah.com>
 <20210218113107.GA12547@1wt.eu>
 <602E766F.758C74D8@users.sourceforge.net>
 <20210218143341.GB13671@1wt.eu>
 <dbLhDu5W6LMrWDRrgzNQJGLZPMWGkRtOcxFUbghT-Uuc8zmQObV5KjhYqVBo2U6k7r2rNVtVEaMjev_lyz8eNQGvksSTjVrHd8LaPrO_6Qs=@protonmail.com>
 <YC6nZH/4CkLLsxxB@kroah.com>
 <sjYC-8XCIa2KTTlzjXs95LPnYQJvJe3Lrz4tR9NZTLLIfQpWLquW6W2siZAP7wtgHXOsK5bSxo8JqJp7iPLQ_NtDhh8GbES8J3dUlB5sqYs=@protonmail.com>
 <YC91OWVGAfyorRbc@kroah.com>
 <QYs3MUT8alABsssQUgn1j3b7BF6zgqqiBq0-76Rqcpo6lPFnKyfd8iAagAfotVhDzKP6FFRIjlRVVoIaRtCAEaNT3P-4gyF43rTEPEsvqEA=@protonmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <QYs3MUT8alABsssQUgn1j3b7BF6zgqqiBq0-76Rqcpo6lPFnKyfd8iAagAfotVhDzKP6FFRIjlRVVoIaRtCAEaNT3P-4gyF43rTEPEsvqEA=@protonmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Feb 19, 2021 at 10:31:49AM +0000, Jari Ruusu wrote:
> On Friday, February 19, 2021 10:22 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > That's not the goal of stable kernel releases/trees. If the driver
> > version that is in 4.19.y does not work for you on release 4.19.0, odds
> > of that "changing" in later stable releases is slim to none.
> 
> But in-tree iwlwifi worked fine on 4.9.y and 4.14.y , and then got broken
> in later 4.14.y versions.

Did you report that breakage to us and the developers of the driver?
Sounds like a regression that people would love to hear about and get
fixed.

> I tried later versions of 4.19.y in an attempt to
> fix the breakage. Basically you are are saying that I should have NOT
> attempted to upgrage 4.9.y -> 4.14.y -> 4.19.y

Without anyone reporting a problem, how can anyone know to fix it?

thanks,

greg k-h