Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933908AbYB2VEg (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Feb 2008 16:04:36 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1760977AbYB2VEZ (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Feb 2008 16:04:25 -0500 Received: from smtp1.linux-foundation.org ([207.189.120.13]:44036 "EHLO smtp1.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751685AbYB2VEY (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Feb 2008 16:04:24 -0500 Date: Fri, 29 Feb 2008 13:02:37 -0800 From: Andrew Morton To: Ingo Molnar Cc: torvalds@linux-foundation.org, roland@redhat.com, tglx@linutronix.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86_64 ia32 syscall restart fix Message-Id: <20080229130237.da291a1e.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20080229173705.GA19423@elte.hu> References: <20080229035707.EAE862700FD@magilla.localdomain> <20080229155207.GC27248@elte.hu> <20080229164510.GA6850@elte.hu> <20080229171737.GA10604@elte.hu> <20080229173705.GA19423@elte.hu> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 2.2.4 (GTK+ 2.8.20; i486-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2901 Lines: 72 On Fri, 29 Feb 2008 18:37:05 +0100 Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > and one area where commit messages are totally important IMO is bug > > forensics. For every regression we find we try to put in the commit ID > > that broke it. Information like that is vital to have a good (and > > objective) picture about how bugs get into and get out of the kernel > > and it also alerts us to change/improve infrastructure if certain > > categories of bugs happen too often. > > another "commit space" feature Thomas and me was thinking about was to > put in "backport suggestions" for -stable the following way: > > Backport-suggested-by: Ingo Molnar > > and the -stable tree could then notice it, and once it has been > backported, they could put in their "done" notifiers via: > > Backported-from: 67ca7bde2e9d3516b5 > > or: > > Backport-rejected: 67ca7bde2e9d3516b5 > > This way the act of suggesting backports to the -stable tree (and their > rejection) could be fully automated, and the answer to the rather > difficult question: > > "has -stable picked up all backport requests, and if not, why?" > > could be scripted up. > > A further (small) variation of this scheme: if a fix is noticed to be a > backport candidate later on, or a user notices that a fix that has gone > upstream fixes a -stable bug too, this information could be signalled in > a separate, special, empty commit: > > Backport-suggested-by: 67ca7bde2e9d35, Ingo Molnar > > > this way subsystem maintainers could have a reliable protocol of getting > fixes integrated into -stable - purely via the commit messages in your > tree. > > ... but then we decided that handling x86 architecture maintainance is > work enough already, without us complicating our own life any further > ;-) > > But the idea is solid nevertheless, and if everyone did it the -stable > guys would have a much easier life as well :-) [ We could start doing it > in x86.git if there's general agreement and if the -stable guys > specifically asked for this. ] > I believe the -stable guys have a bot which trolls the mainline commits mailing list for "cc:.*stable@kernel.org". So anybody anywhere in the patch delivery chain can append "Cc: " and things should get appropriate consideration. The place where I suspect there is a lot of lossage is people simply not thinking about whether a fix should be backported. I'm forever fussing about that for the patches I handle (and I still miss some) but I have a suspicion that not all tree-owners do this fully. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/