On Fri, Feb 02, 2018 at 10:56:36AM +0100, Lukas Bulwahn wrote:
> On Fri, 2 Feb 2018, Jani Nikula wrote:
>
> > Being brutally honest, please write shorter reports and shorter emails
> > to the lists.
> >
> > The static analysis reports are welcome, but only when 1) we didn't
> > already fix it in linux-next, or 2) it reveals an actual bug, not just a
> > warning, warranting a backport.
>
> That will be our policy.
Great!
Also a few other things to be aware of when working with the Linux
kernel community, and to try to answer some of your longer original
email querstions:
- don't scatter emails to tons of lists at the same time. If
you use scripts/get_maintainer.pl on a file, it will tell you
exactly who and what list to notify of an issue found.
- when finding an issue, again, always check linux-next as that
contains up to the past 3 months of work. Don't duplicate
stuff that others have already done, as that doesn't help
anyone out.
- for stable kernel patches, please read:
https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/stable-kernel-rules.html
as to how to report a patch to be included in a stable kernel
release (hint, just send the git hash to the list when it is
in Linus's tree and ask for it to be included, as well as what
trees you think it should be included in.)
- If clang now builds the kernel "cleanly", yes, I want to take
warning fixes in the stable tree. And even better yet, if you
keep working to ensure the tree is "clean", that would be
wonderful.
Hope this helps!
greg k-h
