lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Jun]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 4.0 077/105] drm/i915: Dont skip request retirement if the active list is empty
On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 10:34:37AM +0300, Jani Nikula wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Jun 2015, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 10:29:13AM +0300, Jani Nikula wrote:
> >> On Fri, 19 Jun 2015, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> >> > 4.0-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
> >>
> >> The commit to be backported is already reverted in upstream, and I just
> >> got an email from you backporting the revert as well... would be best to
> >> *not* backport either of these:
> >>
> >> commit 0aedb1626566efd72b369c01992ee7413c82a0c5
> >> Author: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
> >> Date: Thu May 28 18:32:36 2015 +0300
> >>
> >> drm/i915: Don't skip request retirement if the active list is empty
> >>
> >> commit 245ec9d85696c3e539b23e210f248698b478379c
> >> Author: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
> >> Date: Mon Jun 15 12:59:37 2015 +0300
> >>
> >> Revert "drm/i915: Don't skip request retirement if the active list is empty"
> >>
> >> I only marked the revert cc: stable because the original was too.
> >
> > This patch is now in 4.0 so what do I suggest I do? Just take these as
> > well?
> >
> > confused,
>
> Sorry for confusing you. Please take neither or take both.

So, based on what I have queued up, and what is already released in
4.0-stable, we should be fine, right?


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-06-25 17:21    [W:0.138 / U:0.068 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site