Patch "drm: Fix color LUT rounding" has been added to the 6.7-stable tree

[Lucas De Marchi]

On Fri, Feb 02, 2024 at 02:38:57PM -0500, Sasha Levin wrote:
>On Fri, Feb 02, 2024 at 11:35:33AM -0600, Lucas De Marchi wrote:
>>On Fri, Feb 02, 2024 at 06:53:03PM +0200, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
>>>On Thu, Feb 01, 2024 at 11:17:28AM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
>>>>On Thu, Feb 01, 2024 at 08:35:24PM +0200, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
>>>>>On Thu, Feb 01, 2024 at 10:16:48AM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
>>>>>> On Thu, Feb 01, 2024 at 08:05:19PM +0200, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
>>>>>> > On Thu, Feb 01, 2024 at 12:03:20PM -0500, Sasha Levin wrote:
>>>>>> > > This is a note to let you know that I've just added the patch titled
>>>>>> > >
>>>>>> > >     drm: Fix color LUT rounding
>>>>>> > >
>>>>>> > > to the 6.7-stable tree which can be found at:
>>>>>> > >     http://www.kernel.org/git/?p=linux/kernel/git/stable/stable-queue.git;a=summary
>>>>>> > >
>>>>>> > > The filename of the patch is:
>>>>>> > >      drm-fix-color-lut-rounding.patch
>>>>>> > > and it can be found in the queue-6.7 subdirectory.
>>>>>> > >
>>>>>> > > If you, or anyone else, feels it should not be added to the stable tree,
>>>>>> > > please let <stable at vger.kernel.org> know about it.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > I guess I wasn't clear enough in the other mail...
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > NAK for all of backports of this patch.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ok, but why?  It seems that you are fixing a real issue here, right?  If
>>>>>> not, the changelog is not clear with that at all...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'll go drop it now, thanks.
>>>>>
>>>>>Because backporting it would require other backports that depend on
>>>>>the rounding behaviour.
>>>>>
>>>>>Can I somehow fully opt out of these automagic backports?
>>>>>If I want my stuff backported I'll ask for it.
>>>>
>>>>You can, just let me know what exact files should be ignored, or you can
>>>>send a patch against this file:
>>>>	https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/stable-queue.git/tree/ignore_list
>>>
>>>I think we should add at least i915 and xe there. cc: maintainers
>>
>>It does feel a little wild to decide a patch needs to be backported
>>based on the commit title starting with "Fix", or whatever way was used
>>here. We always relied on patches being backported based on a) having a
>>Fixes: trailer and  b) the commit pointed out in that trailer
>>being present in that stable version. Or the others options shown
>>in Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst
>>
>>Looking at the commit in question, c6fbb6bca10838485b820e8a26c23996f77ce580
>>there's no such a trailer. Did I miss something from
>>Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst?
>
>Where did you see anything about the Fixes: trailer in the document
>you've pointed to?

End of "Option 1":

    Note, such tagging is unnecessary if the stable team can derive the
    appropriate versions from Fixes: tags.

Lucas De Marchi

>
>-- 
>Thanks,
>Sasha