On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 09:30:56AM -0800, Bart Van Assche wrote:

On Fri, 2018-11-30 at 10:20 -0700, Jens Axboe wrote:

quoted

On 11/30/18 10:18 AM, Bart Van Assche wrote:

quoted

On Sat, 2018-12-01 at 00:38 +0800, Ming Lei wrote:

quoted

Fixes: 445251d0f4d329a ("blk-mq: fix discard merge with scheduler attached")

Since this patch fixes a bug introduced in kernel v4.16, does it need
a "Cc: stable" tag?

Like the other one, isn't stable implied with Fixes in there? You'd want
a stable backport for any kernel that has that patchset. I think that's
a stronger hint than stable cc.

(+Greg KH)

Hi Greg,

Would it be possible to clarify what your preferences are for adding a
"Cc: stable" tag?

Doesn't:
    https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/stable-kernel-rules.html
describe it well enough?

Hint, putting a "Fixes:" only tag on a patch is nice, but will not
guarantee it will end up in the stable tree.  Only a "Cc: stable@..."
tag will.  Putting both on, if you know the fixes commit, is the best.

thanks,

greg k-h