Greg KH <g...@kroah.com> writes: > On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 10:18:00AM +0200, Arend van Spriel wrote: >> + Greg KH >> >> On 9/12/2017 10:05 AM, Kalle Valo wrote: >> > Arend van Spriel <arend.vanspr...@broadcom.com> writes: >> > >> > > It is actually in the stable-kernel-rules documentation [1]: >> > > >> > > """ >> > > Also, some patches may have kernel version prerequisites. This can be >> > > specified in the following format in the sign-off area: >> > > >> > > .. code-block:: none >> > > >> > > Cc: <sta...@vger.kernel.org> # 3.3.x >> > > >> > > The tag has the meaning of: >> > > >> > > .. code-block:: none >> > > >> > > git cherry-pick <this commit> >> > > >> > > For each "-stable" tree starting with the specified version. >> > > """ >> > >> > Yeah, but it says "starting with" which I interpret as "starting with >> > string '3.3'". For example the commit here would be applied to 3.3.1, >> > 3.3.2 and 3.3.3 etc but _not_ to 3.4, 3.4.1, 3.5 or any later release. >> > >> > Of course I can be way off here, wouldn't be the first :) >> >> Dito. I interpret "each -stable tree" as each stable branch in the stable >> repository. Would Greg know? > > "# 3.8+" and "# 3.8" mean the same thing to me, we would never backport > something to only a very specific kernel version, and leave newer kernel > versions to not have that fix. That would be crazy, and would break our > "no regressions" rule (i.e. newer kernels should always work as good as > older kernels.)
Indeed, that would be crazy. Didn't think it like that, thanks for the clarification. > Don't get hung up on the semantics here people, it's not all that > complicated, and I do it all by hand anyway :) Manually? Oh man, that has to be so hard. I cannot understand how you can do it. -- Kalle Valo
