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:   Tue, 25 Jan 2022 17:53:59 -0800
From:   Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To:     Andy Whitcroft <apw@canonical.com>
Cc:     Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@chromium.org>,
        Ricardo Ribalda <ribalda@chromium.org>,
        Tomasz Figa <tfiga@chromium.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RESEND][PATCH] checkpatch: make sure fix-up patches have Fixes
 tag
Message-Id: <20220125175359.9571d0cb36844ebe69583298@linux-foundation.org>
In-Reply-To: <CAO=4fJPTiNKvru=+qAasMZYUmsGQe+OBH4A2Dd1v-NFdQ8f-Qw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20220119074609.4162747-1-senozhatsky@chromium.org>
        <a70570a10026203b544e930eb6dbcf6ad0abb2ad.camel@perches.com>
        <CAO=4fJPTiNKvru=+qAasMZYUmsGQe+OBH4A2Dd1v-NFdQ8f-Qw@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 09:48:32 +0000 Andy Whitcroft <apw@canonical.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Jan 19, 2022 at 9:42 AM Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 2022-01-19 at 16:46 +0900, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> > > If a patch contains "commit hash (commit name)", in other words
> > > if the patch fixes some particular commit, then require "Fixes:"
> > > tag.
> >
> > I do not like this patch as many commits merely reference a
> > previous patch and do not actually fix anything.
> 
> Agree.  It would need to be a tighter form of language to be safe to
> automatically suggest a Fixes tag.  The point of a Fixes tag is to be
> a semantically safe indicator of this relationship not relying on the
> vagaries of English for that connection.
> 
> You might be ok with something which is a tighter match on like
> "fixes <hash> (<name>)" and only suggesting a Fixes.

Also.

stable tree maintainers appear to have the habit of taking anything
which has Fixes and cheerfully backporting it.  Sometimes undesirably. 
This patch will encourage people to worsen this problem.

I wish this would simply stop, kernel-wide.  Make developers and
tree-owners actually *think* about the backport desirability.

If that were the global approach then checkpatch could

a) ask developers if they should have added "Fixes:" (this patch) then

b) if it has "Fixes:", ask developers if they should have added cc:stable.