Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 3 Apr 2012 09:04:28 -0400 | From | Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <> | Subject | Re: Don't apply 9f022e54b8ea82d1ecdf3bd78d9ab9f44d6b0655 to stable please. |
| |
On Mon, Apr 02, 2012 at 04:49:04PM -0700, Greg KH wrote: > On Mon, Apr 02, 2012 at 04:43:05PM -0700, Suresh Siddha wrote: > > On Mon, 2012-04-02 at 16:27 -0700, Greg KH wrote: > > > On Mon, Apr 02, 2012 at 06:47:02PM -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > > > > Hey Greg, > > > > > > > > The git commit 9f022e54b8ea82d1ecdf3bd78d9ab9f44d6b0655 has CC stable@kernel.org > > > > but it breaks Xen - we are working to fix it in 3.4, but the fix for it > > > > does some architectual changes (136d249ef7dbf0fefa292082cc40be1ea864cbd6) that > > > > I don't know if you are comfortable putting in stable tree. > > > > > > > > > > I have no idea what that git commit id referrs to, as it's not in > > > Linus's tree at the moment. > > > > > > Care to give me a subject? diffstat? Some kind of hint? > > > > Greg, Konrad is referring to: > > > > commit 73d63d038ee9f769f5e5b46792d227fe20e442c5 > > Ok, then where did the 9f022e54b8ea82d1ecdf3bd78d9ab9f44d6b0655 number > come from? And where was I supposed to be able to determine what it is > pointing to?
Hm, somehow that is the git commit I saw, but it probably was b/c it got cherrypicked in my testing tree. > > Come on people... > > > Author: Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@intel.com> > > Date: Mon Mar 12 11:36:33 2012 -0700 > > > > x86/ioapic: Add register level checks to detect bogus io-apic entries > > > > With out this commit, if the bios lists bogus io-apic's, then we will > > see some error messages ("Unable to reset IRR for apic")during linux > > boot which are benign. But as this patch breaks Xen, I am ok if these > > don't get applied to 'stable'. Also I think it is Ingo who added the > > 'stable' tag. Ingo, are you ok with this? > > What stable trees did this already go into in the releases today?
None. That is why I am sending this advance warning so you don't put it in.
> > You need to tell me what I need to revert here, SPECIFICALLY, and in > what tree, if needed, otherwise I have no idea what is going on, sorry, > I can't read minds. > > > For the mainline, we have queued more patches to fix the Xen breakage. > > And what is that supposed to mean to me? > > Again, help me out here, this is making no sense at all. > > How am I supposed to "not apply" a patch that I have never heard of? > And how am I supposed to "not apply" a patch that I have already > applied? > > How about you all start over from the beginning and tell me EXACTLY what > you want me to do here, because I sure as heck don't know what is going > on...
Heh.
The patch titled "x86/ioapic: Add register level checks to detect bogus io-apic entries" (git commit 73d63d038ee9f769f5e5b46792d227fe20e442c5) that is in v3.4-rc1, even thought it has cc: stable@kernel.org, should _NOT_ be applied to the stable tree.
> > confused, > > greg k-h
| |