[PATCH v2 0/3] Fix SATA disk hotplug for Armada 370/XP SoCs

On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 10:59:45AM -0500, Jason Cooper wrote:

Simon,

On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 04:48:34PM +0100, Simon Guinot wrote:

quoted

On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 10:14:04AM -0500, Jason Cooper wrote:

quoted

Simon,

On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 03:50:04PM +0100, Simon Guinot wrote:

quoted

Hello,

This patch series fixes a SATA disk hotplug issue for the Armada 370/XP
SoCs: once a disk is removed from a SATA port, then the re-plug events
are not detected by the sata_mv driver.

This should be applied to the -stable kernels 3.10 and onwards. 

Please add a 'Fixes: <commit-hash> (oneline)' tag below the Cc: stable
tags.  It looks like the sata_mv binding and the Armada 370 DT booting
were both introduced in v3.6, so I would probably use:

Fixes: 9ae6f740b49f (arm: mach-mvebu: add support for Armada 370 and Armada XP with DT)

Hi Jason,

I am not comfortable with this "Fixes: commit_id" notation. It states
that the patch fixes a regression introduced by a given commit. This
hardly makes sense to me because obviously the hotplug issue has not
been introduced by:

"arm: mach-mvebu: add support for Armada 370 and Armada XP with DT".

I know that the purpose is purely administrative, but it is kind of
weird...

True, the wording may not be the best, but the goal is to make it easier
to do a 'tag --contains' search.  We could call it

Repair-Something-Broken-Since-Introduced-by:

in this case ;-)

quoted

quoted

Is there a specific reason you say v3.10?

I could have said nothing as well.

As stable kernel older than 3.10 are no longer maintained, I think
we don't need to point out a specific commit as a -stable target.
Simply Cc'ing -stable without any extra informations should be good
enough.

The reason I ask is that I'd like to know if, in debugging this issue,
you discovered that the fix was not needed before v3.10 (hypothetically,
say because sata hotplug was added in v3.10).

The linux-stable team isn't the only people who find this information
useful.  Distros maintaining older kernels would find it very helpful
when going through -stable patches to know easily if a patch should be
backported further, say to v3.8.

The patches may effectively apply against a 3.6 kernel but who is going
to embed a such kernel on an Armada-based board ?

IMO, stabilize the Armada support for kernels older than 3.10 is a waste
of time, for you, for the -stable maintainers and for me. Some important
features (for Armada SoCs) are missing on this kernels. Then I don't
think that someone is going to use a kernel older than 3.10 with an
Armada-based board.

But anyway, it is not up to me and I have hopefully added all the needed
-stable informations to the v3 patch series.

Simon
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/attachments/20140115/12e03481/attachment-0001.sig>