Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755952AbYJWPsS (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Oct 2008 11:48:18 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752073AbYJWPsF (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Oct 2008 11:48:05 -0400 Received: from e32.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.150]:42165 "EHLO e32.co.us.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751953AbYJWPsC (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Oct 2008 11:48:02 -0400 Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2008 11:47:34 -0400 From: Josh Boyer To: Greg KH Cc: Greg KH , "Theodore Ts'o" , Zwane Mwaikambo , torvalds@linux-foundation.org, Eugene Teo , Justin Forbes , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Chris Wedgwood , Domenico Andreoli , Randy Dunlap , Willy Tarreau , Michael Krufky , alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk, Chuck Ebbert , Dave Jones , akpm@linux-foundation.org, Jake Edge , Chuck Wolber , stable@kernel.org, Rodrigo Rubira Branco Subject: Re: [stable] [patch 00/17] 2.6.27-stable review Message-ID: <20081023114734.483e9724@zod.rchland.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: <20081023153348.GA3995@kroah.com> References: <20081018183334.GA14035@suse.de> <20081023010126.GB30920@zod.rchland.ibm.com> <20081023045345.GB6949@kroah.com> <20081023063339.11c99044@zod.rchland.ibm.com> <20081023153348.GA3995@kroah.com> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.5.0 (GTK+ 2.12.8; i386-redhat-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: 3310 Lines: 74 On Thu, 23 Oct 2008 08:33:48 -0700 Greg KH wrote: > On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 06:33:39AM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote: > > On Wed, 22 Oct 2008 21:53:45 -0700 > > Greg KH wrote: > > > > > On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 09:01:26PM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote: > > > > On Sat, Oct 18, 2008 at 11:33:34AM -0700, Greg KH wrote: > > > > >This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 2.6.27.3 release. > > > > >There are 17 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response > > > > >to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being applied, please > > > > >let us know. If anyone is a maintainer of the proper subsystem, and > > > > >wants to add a Signed-off-by: line to the patch, please respond with it. > > > > > > > > > >These patches are sent out with a number of different people on the > > > > >Cc: line. If you wish to be a reviewer, please email stable@kernel.org > > > > >to add your name to the list. If you want to be off the reviewer list, > > > > >also email us. > > > > > > > > > >Responses should be made by Wed, October 22, 2008 19:00:00 UTC. > > > > >Anything received after that time might be too late. > > > > > > > > OK, I realize I'm late. Apologies in advance for that. > > > > > > > > I don't see how patches 3, 16, and 17 really fit into the "stable" > > > > rules. None of them: > > > > > > > > "... fix a problem that causes a build error (but not for things > > > > marked CONFIG_BROKEN), an oops, a hang, data corruption, a real > > > > security issue, or some "oh, that's not good" issue. In short, > > > > something critical." > > > > > > > > So, are we being a bit more lax on the requirements for the > > > > -stable kernels and I missed the memo, or? > > > > > > Huh? > > > > > > Patch 3: > > > Driver core: Fix cleanup in device_create_vargs(). > > > solves a memory leak on an error path that has every opportunity to > > > happen in the driver core. Do you think this is not a real bug? > > > > Grr.. Typo on my part. Patch 4 is the one I originally meant: > > "Driver Core: Clarify device cleanup." It changes nothing but > > comments. I don't think it's a big deal at all, but are documentation > > changes also allowed now? > > It was a documentation change, fixing the information for a core API > call to be correct and match what the code really does. > > It also carried no risk of a regression, and as such, I decided to take > it. If you note, we have also taken other patches that fix up > documentation issues like this in the past, so it was not the first > time. > > Was this that big of a deal? No. I said that already. I'm just trying to clarify what the expectations are for -stable because when it first started stuff liek that wasn't taken. Also, it seems nobody has updated the documentation file as -stable has evolved. I'd be more than happy to correct that, but I just need to get a feel for where -stable is at before I can do that. Not trying to be a stick in the mud, just trying to help. If you'd rather I don't, that's fine too. josh -- 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/