Re: [PATCH v2] media: ov5640: fix get_light_freq on auto

[Sakari Ailus]

Hi Greg,

On Fri, Dec 13, 2024 at 12:12:18PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 13, 2024 at 11:30:38AM +0100, Michal Simek wrote:
> > Hi Ailus, +Greg
> > 
> > On 12/13/24 09:54, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> > > Hi Michal,
> > > 
> > > Thanks for the patch.
> > > 
> > > On Fri, Nov 22, 2024 at 09:28:01AM +0100, Michal Simek wrote:
> > > > From: Sam Bobrowicz <sam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > 
> > > > Light frequency was not properly returned when in auto
> > > > mode and the detected frequency was 60Hz.
> > > > 
> > > > Fixes: 19a81c1426c1 ("[media] add Omnivision OV5640 sensor driver")
> > > > Signed-off-by: Sam Bobrowicz <sam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Michal Simek <michal.simek@xxxxxxx>
> > > > Cc: <stable@xxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> That address is totally acceptable.

The documentation (Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst) tells to
use stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx nevertheless (we're not discussing the latter
option here):

To have a patch you submit for mainline inclusion later automatically picked up
for stable trees, add this tag in the sign-off area::

  Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Use ``Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxx`` instead when fixing unpublished vulnerabilities:
it reduces the chance of accidentally exposing the fix to the public by way of
'git send-email', as mails sent to that address are not delivered anywhere.

> 
> > > Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > 
> > > And right after the Fixes: tag.
> > > 
> > > I fixed it this time.
> 
> Neither is required at all.

Right, I must have confused this with Reported-by: and Closes:.

> 
> > Thanks for this. I was trying to find out if this is described anywhere
> > because in stable tree both ways are used. Also Greg's script didn't report
> > any issue with it. Is it a rule for media tree or your rule or described
> > somewhere?
> 
> It's not a rule anywhere, and the use of stable@xxxxxxxxxx is also
> documented (it routes to /dev/null and can be used just to tag stuff, no
> one is going to answer that email at all.)
> 
> > I have no problem with that rule but just want to understand where this
> > request is coming from.
> 
> No idea, I have no such rule, and in fact I use stable@xxxxxxxxxx all
> the time for my subsystems.
> 
> thanks,
> 
> greg k-h

-- 
Regards,

Sakari Ailus