Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 06C08C64ED6 for ; Tue, 28 Feb 2023 10:41:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230208AbjB1KlW (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Feb 2023 05:41:22 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:56390 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229509AbjB1KlU (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Feb 2023 05:41:20 -0500 Received: from mail-ua1-x935.google.com (mail-ua1-x935.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::935]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DECEB24106; Tue, 28 Feb 2023 02:41:19 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-ua1-x935.google.com with SMTP id l24so797700uac.12; Tue, 28 Feb 2023 02:41:19 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; t=1677580879; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=8DbVfOckXlAwnJnMHcsh1q8vZl9XSwnyP9AZsJxgsg4=; b=dYmNo5q063Mxj4sRwSDBshps42BgANMZzJ8NIms3DO9OZ1erbLJBn1bI/++dPPOZ9j SMQJ+pP6S74SUAZviENXfMIns2uD1CbtpvsuY71WE1Z1e/1HQ+VuhRa2/kVSb8hlCK20 SjGV3LqPnDl+bPFgpdzIRJgTG5HsdMfMV60qhikfRuMuTtChaFNOamja2scFf5vnk/E9 aalmU0sinLAviHRrTkJksfXmzEu+iI3jDD4N7NL5d0SJA7iHWM+ipoyrvDTk+CxcGIAT CNC3shgktuDolX46+Z+j31Uk+SGKZjQ/VAQsKRnAAKjsj318ozW7A0fNNms1XgWW53ud Pc4w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; t=1677580879; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=8DbVfOckXlAwnJnMHcsh1q8vZl9XSwnyP9AZsJxgsg4=; b=Nwg6boTwnoKy5ppHpqCIpYIfKFgTrG3u7wfv5N298DVV4w98bF+C0H6N46auCj4Rd8 nV47UlKtBFC4stjCYTHzd0wovtbD3aH1ydjA59y8cJS26wdFQi3RcMPvK0t53lcHkHrU 8gKNkha7YaCoGQnNBBPcSIHiKPBH1R6Jqo2jMt/cLD7X0GejwIKvnBYthC9S8K+Q9Jto fsOmniiukKBHYIkR2SOlB+dgnSAbqDHIU9AzT05dwI2WFM6doJjFoOIHEP1ZWLGam6Zy V/rV/Nf4Ch05T197dlEgCdnAKO+ysbZ3iTvCSijbhk98BAZKMNrWqgfESjQ9ft1U2MNR zGVA== X-Gm-Message-State: AO0yUKWEYOsccuVXlXx3ON+CuN/aB6OVRPuLeb0pqM5kmy72GB7tGJJc eBo8JzaZzOPbeOcGwjnhRp9mRHfFUx79IAaIWAc= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AK7set+qBzkp5toODpAUw2ZZQlYyfMm2QZP7Sb0CMFTpsGk2V4xMYDfU3UbLNa2hh9TtB5fTmaYulOtIXe9TiOz9lbo= X-Received: by 2002:ac5:c85c:0:b0:40e:fee9:667a with SMTP id g28-20020ac5c85c000000b0040efee9667amr1014736vkm.3.1677580878928; Tue, 28 Feb 2023 02:41:18 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Amir Goldstein Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2023 12:41:07 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: AUTOSEL process To: Eric Biggers Cc: Sasha Levin , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > > I'm not sure how feedback in the form of "this sucks but I'm sure it > > could be much better" is useful. > > I've already given you some specific suggestions. > > I can't force you to listen to them, of course. > Eric, As you probably know, this is not the first time that the subject of the AUTOSEL process has been discussed. Here is one example from fsdevel with a few other suggestions [1]. But just so you know, as a maintainer, you have the option to request that patches to your subsystem will not be selected by AUTOSEL and run your own process to select, test and submit fixes to stable trees. xfs maintainers have done that many years ago. This choice has consequences though - for years, no xfs fixes were flowing into stable trees at all, because no one was doing the backport work. It is hard to imagine that LTS kernel users were more happy about this situation than they would be from occasional regressions, but who knows... It has taken a long time until we found the resources and finally started a process of reviewing, testing and submitting xfs fixes to stable trees and this process involves a lot of resources (3 maintainers + $$$), so opting out of AUTOSEL is not a clear win. I will pencil down yet another discussion on fs and stable process at LSFMM23 to update on the current status with xfs, but it is hard to believe that this time we will be able to make significant changes to the AUTOSEL process. Thanks, Amir. [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-fsdevel/20201204160227.GA577125@mit.edu/#t