Return-path: <linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mail-gw3-out.broadcom.com ([216.31.210.64]:52576 "EHLO
	mail-gw3-out.broadcom.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1751781AbaKFVFk (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>);
	Thu, 6 Nov 2014 16:05:40 -0500
Message-ID: <545BE2A1.1040806@broadcom.com> (sfid-20141106_220820_616622_E40148F8)
Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2014 22:05:37 +0100
From: Arend van Spriel <arend@broadcom.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>
CC: Ronald Wahl <ronald.wahl@raritan.com>,
	Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>,
	"<linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>" <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>,
	Christian Lamparter <chunkeey@googlemail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mac80211: Fix regression that triggers a kernel BUG with
 CCMP
References: <1415267752-4704-1-git-send-email-ronald.wahl@raritan.com>	<1415268135.1884.1.camel@sipsolutions.net>	<545B6AD3.8020301@broadcom.com>	<1415277562.17015.4.camel@sipsolutions.net>	<545B7290.6060409@raritan.com>	<1415279690.17015.7.camel@sipsolutions.net>	<545B7CB2.4080507@raritan.com> <CAKv+Gu-GE7R204_J9g4pumvuW1zA1ijVk20-5heCb9yoUuR3fg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAKv+Gu-GE7R204_J9g4pumvuW1zA1ijVk20-5heCb9yoUuR3fg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed
Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-wireless.vger.kernel.org>

On 11/06/14 14:55, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> On 6 November 2014 14:50, Ronald Wahl<ronald.wahl@raritan.com>  wrote:
>> On 06.11.2014 14:14, Johannes Berg wrote:
>>>
>>> On Thu, 2014-11-06 at 14:07 +0100, Ronald Wahl wrote:
>>>
>>>> But there are LTS kernels not maintained by Greg like 3.12 and 3.16. How
>>>> about these? If sending patches to stable@kernel org is optional then
>>>> it's better to kill that list or silently drop emails send to this list
>>>> so no errors are returned for this address.
>>>
>>>
>>> They can pick it up the same way though, no? Actually I think they
>>> usually pick it up from Greg's tree anyway :)
>>
>>
>> "Can" and "do" are different things. And you "think" you know what others
>> people do but do you really "know" it? Anyway your original comment sounded
>> a bit like "avoid sending it to the stable kernel mailinglist otherwise
>> unwanted things might happen". In the end this raises the question why that
>> stable kernel mailing still list exists or why there is no general rule not
>> to send mails to it.
>>
>> So in the end that currently means that it is not wrong to send mail to
>> stable@vger.kernel.org but it is your opinion that it is just not really
>> necessary, right?
>>
>
> You used to get an autoreply like this when cc'ing stable@ directly
>
> """
> <formletter>
>
> This is not the correct way to submit patches for inclusion in the
> stable kernel tree.  Please read Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt
> for how to do this properly.
>
> </formletter>
> """
>
> You are only supposed to send patches to the mailing list if they are
> already upstream, i.e., if you know the upstream commit id of the
> patch.

Actually, adding the "Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org" tag will assure that 
Greg picks it up automatically from upstream thus no need to send the 
patch to stable provided it will apply to stable trees as is.

Regards,
Arend