Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Tue, 1 Mar 2022 09:48:49 +0100
From:   Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
To:     Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>
Cc:     Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
        "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>,
        tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com, luto@kernel.org,
        peterz@infradead.org, sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com,
        aarcange@redhat.com, ak@linux.intel.com, dan.j.williams@intel.com,
        david@redhat.com, hpa@zytor.com, jgross@suse.com,
        jmattson@google.com, joro@8bytes.org, knsathya@kernel.org,
        pbonzini@redhat.com, sdeep@vmware.com, seanjc@google.com,
        tony.luck@intel.com, vkuznets@redhat.com, wanpengli@tencent.com,
        thomas.lendacky@amd.com, brijesh.singh@amd.com, x86@kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv4 01/30] x86/mm: Fix warning on build with
 X86_MEM_ENCRYPT=y
Message-ID: <Yh3d8Trp4ZCmdOW2@nazgul.tnic>
References: <20220224155630.52734-1-kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>
 <20220224155630.52734-2-kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>
 <20220227220130.23yjme7jucxo266l@treble>
 <20220228162056.gul22bjr4w6zjslq@black.fi.intel.com>
 <20220228164007.nfrg7xvrl4blzzrm@treble>
 <080f9306-8c72-c7bd-010a-f0ed32c4b692@intel.com>
 <20220228171159.pkp3t46pxbs6o2ul@treble>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20220228171159.pkp3t46pxbs6o2ul@treble>
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 09:11:59AM -0800, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> People rely on the "Fixes:" tag for actual bug fixes.  Using it here --
> along with the rest of the "this is fixing a bug" tone of the title and
> description -- is guaranteed to confuse stable maintainers and distros
> doing backports.

Yes, they very much do. There's even automatic tools which look at Fixes
and give people work. So yeah, pls don't take this lightly.

> I would call it misinformation.  How is that useful?
> 
> It's ok to reference a related commit in the patch description itself.
> Just don't abuse the "Fixes" tag.
> 
> But IMO, for the least amount of confusion, it makes more sense to
> squash this with the patch which actually requires it.

Full ack. Please squash it into the patch which causes the issue. And
frankly, I don't understand why you guys are making such a fuss about it
and why this needs to be a separate patch, at all?!

Thx.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette