Re: DM Regression in 4.16-rc1 - read() returns data when it shouldn't

[Thorsten Leemhuis]

Hi Mike! On 19.02.2018 18:15, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 19 2018 at  8:44am -0500,
> Thorsten Leemhuis <regressions@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
>> JFYI: This issues is tracked in the regression reports for Linux 4.16
>> (http://bit.ly/lnxregrep416 ) with this id:
>> Linux-Regression-ID: lr#9e195f
>> Please include this line in the comment section of patches that are
> [â]
> The fix was already merged by Linus on Friday, see:
> git.kernel.org/linus/8dd601fa8317243be887458c49f6c29c2f3d719f

Ohh, thx for the pointer. Could you please next time add a tag like

Fixes: 18a25da84354 ("dm: ensure bio submission follows a depth-first
tree walk")

to the commit? For details see
Documnetation/process/submitting-patches.rst section 2 and 13:
https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/submitting-patches.html

That would have saved both of us this conversation. In addition I head
that at least one big Linux distributor is using those tags when
backporting changes to make sure all relevant fixes for a particular
backported commit get backported as well.

> But moving forward I have no interest in sprinkling external metadata
> references in Linux commit headers. 
> 
> Seems more like you're engineering something that gives you, and
> possibly a select few others, meaning but that is make work for all
> Linux maintainers.

I just asked you to help me make regression tracking work a little bit
easier. I'm neither planing to enforce this nor in a position to do so,
thus feel free to not do what I asked for; that's totally fine for me.
Especially as those tags are only a interim solution afaics (one that I
don't like to much myself; but they sometimes help connecting the
various dots in the phase where the commit that introduced a regression
is not yet known).

Ciao, Thorsten