Re: [PATCH][next] loop: Fix missing max_active argument in alloc_workqueue call

From: Krzysztof Kozlowski
Date: Fri Mar 19 2021 - 06:05:12 EST

On 19/03/2021 10:47, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 02:42:33PM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> On 3/18/21 2:24 PM, Colin Ian King wrote:
>>> On 18/03/2021 20:12, Jens Axboe wrote:
>>>> On 3/18/21 9:16 AM, Colin King wrote:
>>>>> From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>> The 3rd argument to alloc_workqueue should be the max_active count,
>>>>> however currently it is the lo->lo_number that is intended for the
>>>>> loop%d number. Fix this by adding in the missing max_active count.
>>>> Dan, please fold this (or something similar) in when you're redoing the
>>>> series.
>>> Appreciate this fix being picked up. Are we going to lose the SoB?
>> If it's being redone, would be silly to have that error in there. Do
>> we have a tag that's appropriate for this? I often wonder when I'm
>> folding in a fix. Ala Fixes-by: or something like that.
> I've always lobied for a Fixes-from: tag, but the kbuild-bot tells
> everyone to add a Reported-by: tag. But then a lot of people are like
> Reported-by doesn't make sense. And other people are like Reported-by
> is fine, what's wrong with it?

If the original commit is a fix and the fix for it is being squashed,
then Reported-by might mislead.

kbuild-bot tests also patches from list directly, so in such case the
patch can be re-done with a risk of loosing kbuild's credits. But when
the patch is already in the maintainer tree - just create a fixup. You
preserve the development history and the kbuild's credits.

Best regards,