Re: [GIT PULL] Networking for v7.3-rc5

[Linus Torvalds]

On Thu, 24 Sept 2026 at 11:33, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Every week in this release is record-setting for number of posted
> patches. It doesn't seem like we're creating any regressions with
> all these fixes, 3 Fixes tags here point to 7.2 commits but none
> are true regression fixes. We're trying to keep the count down,
> nonetheless.

I'm looking at those ovpn fixes, for example, and they fix old stuff
and they aren't marked for stable. The ones I looked at seemed to go
back to ovpn being basically merged initially.

So they clearly aren't regression fixes. Why are they in an -rc at all then?

Are they actually important enough that they shouldn't just go into linux-next?

Your merge message notes don't even mention them, which to me says
"not important".

"Not a regression, not critical" should mean "next release, not rc material".

Maybe it *is* important, but then it should be mentioned.

I've pulled this, but I really am trying to start pushing back on
pointless "fixes" after the merge window.

For post-merge-window patches, it is NOT ENOUGH to just be "a fix".

It needs to be a regression, or it needs to be critical. It needs to
be something that would merit the change being marked for stable.

Regressions are serious business. They break existing setups. They
make it painful for people to upgrade. They are critical, in other
words.

But stuff that has been broken since the first release of the code?

Sure, it *can* be a very important security fix. Or - more likely -
it's just a codepath that doesn't matter, never did, and was found by
some random LLM and that's the only reason it now shows up.

            Linus