Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-210450-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:4601:e00::3 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:4601:e00::3;
Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2024 11:38:55 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@linaro.org>
Cc: Thorsten Leemhuis <linux@leemhuis.info>, Andy Whitcroft
 <apw@canonical.com>, Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>, Dwaipayan Ray
 <dwaipayanray1@gmail.com>, Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@gmail.com>,
 linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Greg Kroah-Hartman
 <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, Kees Cook
 <keescook@chromium.org>, Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>, Tom Gall
 <tom.gall@linaro.org>, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] checkpatch: check for missing Fixes tags
Message-Id: <20240611113855.b63a6015b26a0dad49d9f2a7@linux-foundation.org>
In-Reply-To: <ZmhUgZBKeF_8ixA6@moroto>
References: <ZmhUgZBKeF_8ixA6@moroto>
Precedence: bulk
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Tue, 11 Jun 2024 16:43:29 +0300 Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@linaro.org> wrote:

> This check looks for common words that probably indicate a patch
> is a fix.  For now the regex is:
> 
> 	(?:(?:BUG: K.|UB)SAN: |Call Trace:|stable\@|syzkaller)/)
> 
> Why are stable patches encouraged to have a fixes tag?  Some people mark
> their stable patches as "# 5.10" etc.  This is useful but a Fixes tag is
> still a good idea.

I'd say that "# 5.10" is lame and it would be good if checkpatch could
detect this and warn "hey, use a proper Fixes:".  Because

> It  helps people to not cherry-pick buggy patches without also
> cherry-picking the fix.

seems pretty important.