Re: 3.3.x: e1000 and ixgbe hang

[David Miller]

From: Wolfgang Walter <wolfgang.walter@xxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 9 May 2012 18:57:13 +0200

> But when we are at it: I think that when a bug in a stable kernel is
> found and the final fix is known it is bad practice to hord that
> patch till submission without letting stable@ know about it.

I think you have no idea what goes into vetting patches for -stable.

It can take me days to put together a series, and also I time my
-stable submissions with when Linus pulls my 'net' bug fixes into his
tree since a part of the -stable requirements is presence in Linus's
tree.

I therefore batch, because bleeding out individual fixes one by one to
-stable rarely, if ever, makes sense.

And another part of what goes into vetting a patch is time.  The
longer a patch sits in a non-stable tree getting tested, the more
likely any unwanted bugs and side effects will be caught before the
patch goes into -stable.

And finally I am under no obligation whatsoever to post some kind of
status report to -stable every few days saying when I'll do this or
that.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/