On Fri, May 04, 2018 at 07:35:42PM -0400, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote: >On Fri, May 04, 2018 at 09:51:14PM +0000, Sasha Levin wrote: >> I don't have an objection to moving this to it's own tag. It will make >> my scripts somewhat simpler for sure. > >It's not a matter "moving this it's own tag", but creating a new tag >--- because what is in the docs is a lie. It does not describe what >we do today. And current practice is the reality, not what is in the >docs.
I'm really confused here. What do you mean with "not describe what we do today"? The doc allows for three ways to tag a patch: 1. Empty tag: "Cc: sta...@vger.kernel.org" 2. With a version, quoting from the doc: Also, some patches may have kernel version prerequisites. This can be specified in the following format in the sign-off area: Cc: <sta...@vger.kernel.org> # 3.3.x The tag has the meaning of: git cherry-pick <this commit> For each "-stable" tree starting with the specified version. 3. With a prereq commit, which is in the form of: Cc: <sta...@vger.kernel.org> # 3.3.x: a1f84a3: sched: Check for idle We expect this to be used rarely used, and indeed it's not used as much. >As to whether we should create a new tag to support explicit >dependencies, I'll leave that between you and Greg K-H and the rest of >the stable maintainers. :-)