From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754308AbdK1U12 (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Nov 2017 15:27:28 -0500 Received: from mga06.intel.com ([134.134.136.31]:15963 "EHLO mga06.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753164AbdK1U10 (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Nov 2017 15:27:26 -0500 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.44,468,1505804400"; d="scan'208";a="154132951" Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] RDMA/hns: Bug fixes in hns RoCE driver To: Jason Gunthorpe , Bart Van Assche Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org" , "xavier_huwei@163.com" , "linuxarm@huawei.com" , "xavier.huwei@huawei.com" , "xavier.huwei@tom.com" , "leon@kernel.org" , "dledford@redhat.com" References: <1511750484-102395-1-git-send-email-xavier.huwei@huawei.com> <20171127183637.GA13966@ziepe.ca> <20171128061517.GO29104@mtr-leonro.local> <6e9c4251-8e56-54e2-b186-d3d5b1b85204@intel.com> <20171128183910.GA21325@ziepe.ca> <1511895042.28512.6.camel@wdc.com> <20171128193311.GB21325@ziepe.ca> From: Dennis Dalessandro Message-ID: Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2017 15:27:23 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20171128193311.GB21325@ziepe.ca> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 11/28/2017 2:33 PM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 06:50:44PM +0000, Bart Van Assche wrote: >> On Tue, 2017-11-28 at 11:39 -0700, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: >>> On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 08:20:09AM -0500, Dennis Dalessandro wrote: >>>> I could resubmit just the series, or you could just pick the 4 driver >>>> patches from patchworks whatever is easiest. >>> >>> I marked them in patchworks, but can you review the commit messages >>> and make sure you think Linus will see them as rc material too? >> >> My understanding is that the rc stage is intended primarily for fixes for >> bugs introduced during the merge window. For all patches that do not fix >> bugs introduced during the merge window it should be evaluated carefully >> whether or not these are important enough to be included in a rc pull request. > > Oh? I thought it was more up to the maintainer discretion within some > limits. Eg I thought we were running rdma more with the 'if it is OK > for -stable, then it is OK -rc' kind of mentality? That's always been my understanding. > eg -rc is for stablization and bugfixing only, and not restricted only > to bugs introduced in the latest merge window?? Makes no sense to me to have a hard restriction here. Security fixes, panics, and other serious bugs should certainly qualify. Of course that is subject to how complex the fix is. -Denny