Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-125079-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.48.161 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.48.161;
From: Valentin Obst <kernel@valentinobst.de>
To: miguel.ojeda.sandonis@gmail.com
Cc: a.hindborg@samsung.com,
	alex.gaynor@gmail.com,
	aliceryhl@google.com,
	benno.lossin@proton.me,
	bjorn3_gh@protonmail.com,
	boqun.feng@gmail.com,
	gary@garyguo.net,
	kernel@valentinobst.de,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	ojeda@kernel.org,
	rust-for-linux@vger.kernel.org,
	walmeida@microsoft.com,
	wedsonaf@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] In-place module initialisation
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2024 15:00:30 +0100
Message-ID: <20240329140030.3989-1-kernel@valentinobst.de>
In-Reply-To: <CANiq72mkHM3qfq66oDZyZMCuLK8Y1tJxEqFhSYpFWg7ihfcvEA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANiq72mkHM3qfq66oDZyZMCuLK8Y1tJxEqFhSYpFWg7ihfcvEA@mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
UI-OutboundReport: notjunk:1;M01:P0:vZSxkjK2pFM=;yHMq3mvBCSS8jCePIb97pS1ScpS
 AS3W/yCGIrcZFiaa4aPIkecMJWuJKPQfBWIZ0cikQXd88S2wc6yfDNPIEGSZMkDHuf/TnPdu4
 0C+W1pHzeMEsAe8E4x9SEuMEwFFUvpH0+Xz0CANThyVMGa0YDMV30XkvcA9AhQ7ZVTdi7+/1C
 LAwGl18TWZwsldy5N6IrWwwCKwhRzYEPmhg5nC1EQJvi/FzNHKLWhi8ZFG/vZIZ3PXh7UkTUC
 xJ4VN4+9ItrbhPIiBLdGgLaFdOqm+Vrk/r075dENsm7yivVIF56u+E9dtMHnmBY34zwtU/0mI
 lARKISM2H2ARDkVEfbNauB06DlDHuNjBqwbeEpihpOaLpc65YGPeeTLi+toqskSqfeB1ISyQU
 6kRTxkZ0qMifElnu8B+5G8hQI2kqT0UBqZ+tnIVyv0BHxROc9Xm/svbyJoGJVxKLL5WhqtJ5P
 cu3qwW7sPMBfYAW9MkWzTWZMFZZlg/dD77URHq/wgHEhPzN+nOjREs64npSSNJqtEvdsRZO6b
 8gH1bNeB6+bnFpZjaUDSdciltQVcCOYhNgeXPIm5nkGg+WH9UlN6tFvqF8U5CqabABX8+sL2t
 d92zNMQOxBZuDpSJmDrstwpPj+ixNGNQZNCSUtQ9BfNXFmIhvJVHJ1N+kNE65AwUYN2/IboIQ
 P0Sb4ZI3M5ibcVucNlZVGGzTRoq3g0cZISTz907FsU2yDOZA3hUdGCOUQNWnkDPnkKbsDKBjr
 AfdAjpZgExZ1irZVFd+hbYSQ6nyEq89ry1VLc44M4CKnrg9Wh7RUi0=

> > I think the idea in [1] was to have this patch being included in the
> > stable trees. I got little experience with stable trees but wouldn't t=
he
> > easiest way be that you add:
> >
> >         Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # 6.8.x: 715dd8950d4e rust: phy: im=
plement `Send` for `Registration`
> >         Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> >         Fixes: 247b365dc8dc ("rust: add `kernel` crate")
> >
> > in the sign-off section for this patch? (Or mark the first one for sta=
ble
> > inclusion as well, [2] has more information on that).
>
> 715dd8950d4e is your local hash for 1/5, right? So I would drop the
> hash, because it may be confusing.

Ah, right, of course this won't be the hash of the commit in mainline;

>
> It may be possible to remove the first line (since 1/5 will only apply
> to 6.8.x and it is already the previous patch in the series, while the

If I interpret the docs correctly, previous patches in the same series are
only implicitly considered as prerequisites for the marked patch if they
are marked themselves:

    "[...] you do not have to list patch1 as prerequisite of patch2
    if you have already marked patch1 for stable inclusion."

So I guess it is important to be explicit.

> `Fixes` tag here may make it clear that 2/5 should still go everywhere
> regardless of 1/5), but I guess it does not hurt to be extra clear.
>
> What about:
>
>     Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # 6.8.x: rust: phy: implement `Send`
> for `Registration`
>     Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # 6.1+
>     Fixes: 247b365dc8dc ("rust: add `kernel` crate")

Looks reasonable to me; Also think that the 6.1+ is not striclty necessary
due to the `Fixes` tag though.

    - Best Valentin

>
> Cheers,
> Miguel