| Message ID | 20170719092323.396710042@linuxfoundation.org (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
Hey Greg,
On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 11:43:32AM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> 4.12-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
Why did you skip this patch for 4.11? IMO it should be applied there too.
Daniel
On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 12:37:47PM +0200, Daniel Kiper wrote: > Hey Greg, > > On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 11:43:32AM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > 4.12-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know. > > Why did you skip this patch for 4.11? IMO it should be applied there too. Are you sure it actually applied? (hint, it did not...) If you want it in 4.11, or older kernels, please provide a working backport. thanks, greg k-h
On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 01:12:14PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 12:37:47PM +0200, Daniel Kiper wrote: > > Hey Greg, > > > > On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 11:43:32AM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > > 4.12-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know. > > > > Why did you skip this patch for 4.11? IMO it should be applied there too. > > Are you sure it actually applied? (hint, it did not...) > > If you want it in 4.11, or older kernels, please provide a working > backport. And, in the future, if you want it to be applied to older kernels, or be notified if it can not be, please add a kernel version number in the stable marking: Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # 4.0+ or use the Fixes: tag: Fixes: SHASHAHSA ("short description") which I pick up on and let you know if the patch does not actually apply back to the kernel that the fixes: tag was in. hope this helps, greg k-h
On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 01:12:14PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 12:37:47PM +0200, Daniel Kiper wrote: > > Hey Greg, > > > > On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 11:43:32AM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > > 4.12-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know. > > > > Why did you skip this patch for 4.11? IMO it should be applied there too. > > Are you sure it actually applied? (hint, it did not...) > > If you want it in 4.11, or older kernels, please provide a working > backport. OK, if it did not apply then probably there were some changes in the code here and there. Though, IIRC, fix itself is perfectly valid for 4.11. So, I will post updated patch for it. Thanks, Daniel
On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 01:19:58PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 01:12:14PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 12:37:47PM +0200, Daniel Kiper wrote: > > > Hey Greg, > > > > > > On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 11:43:32AM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > > > 4.12-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know. > > > > > > Why did you skip this patch for 4.11? IMO it should be applied there too. > > > > Are you sure it actually applied? (hint, it did not...) > > > > If you want it in 4.11, or older kernels, please provide a working > > backport. > > And, in the future, if you want it to be applied to older kernels, or be > notified if it can not be, please add a kernel version number in the > stable marking: > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # 4.0+ > or use the Fixes: tag: > Fixes: SHASHAHSA ("short description") > which I pick up on and let you know if the patch does not actually apply > back to the kernel that the fixes: tag was in. > > hope this helps, Sure thing! Thanks a lot! Daniel
* Daniel Kiper <daniel.kiper@oracle.com> wrote: > Hey Greg, > > On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 11:43:32AM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > 4.12-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know. > > Why did you skip this patch for 4.11? IMO it should be applied there too. The thing is, this patch should probaly not even be in v4.12, as it should only make any difference if there's a separate _bug_ in the kernel. This patch makes things more robust going forward, but I question that it needs to be in -stable. Thanks, Ingo
On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 10:39:10AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Daniel Kiper <daniel.kiper@oracle.com> wrote: > > > Hey Greg, > > > > On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 11:43:32AM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > > 4.12-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know. > > > > Why did you skip this patch for 4.11? IMO it should be applied there too. > > The thing is, this patch should probaly not even be in v4.12, as it should only > make any difference if there's a separate _bug_ in the kernel. > > This patch makes things more robust going forward, but I question that it needs to > be in -stable. Yeah, good point, I'm going to go drop it entirely from the 4.12-stable tree as it obviously isn't stable material, sorry for not catching that before. thanks, greg k-h
* Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 10:39:10AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > * Daniel Kiper <daniel.kiper@oracle.com> wrote: > > > > > Hey Greg, > > > > > > On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 11:43:32AM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > > > 4.12-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know. > > > > > > Why did you skip this patch for 4.11? IMO it should be applied there too. > > > > The thing is, this patch should probaly not even be in v4.12, as it should only > > make any difference if there's a separate _bug_ in the kernel. > > > > This patch makes things more robust going forward, but I question that it needs to > > be in -stable. > > Yeah, good point, I'm going to go drop it entirely from the 4.12-stable > tree as it obviously isn't stable material, sorry for not catching that > before. I should have caught the tag as well when applying the upstream patch to begin with. Thanks! Ingo
On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 11:16:39AM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 10:39:10AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > * Daniel Kiper <daniel.kiper@oracle.com> wrote: > > > > > Hey Greg, > > > > > > On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 11:43:32AM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > > > 4.12-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know. > > > > > > Why did you skip this patch for 4.11? IMO it should be applied there too. > > > > The thing is, this patch should probaly not even be in v4.12, as it should only > > make any difference if there's a separate _bug_ in the kernel. > > > > This patch makes things more robust going forward, but I question that it needs to > > be in -stable. > > Yeah, good point, I'm going to go drop it entirely from the 4.12-stable > tree as it obviously isn't stable material, sorry for not catching that > before. Wait a minute. IIRC, Juergen told me last week that this patch fixes a bug found/assigned by/to him. Juergen? If it is true then I would apply it to stable. If I am wrong you can drop it. Thanks, Daniel
On 20/07/17 14:33, Daniel Kiper wrote: > On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 11:16:39AM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: >> On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 10:39:10AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: >>> >>> * Daniel Kiper <daniel.kiper@oracle.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Hey Greg, >>>> >>>> On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 11:43:32AM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: >>>>> 4.12-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know. >>>> >>>> Why did you skip this patch for 4.11? IMO it should be applied there too. >>> >>> The thing is, this patch should probaly not even be in v4.12, as it should only >>> make any difference if there's a separate _bug_ in the kernel. >>> >>> This patch makes things more robust going forward, but I question that it needs to >>> be in -stable. >> >> Yeah, good point, I'm going to go drop it entirely from the 4.12-stable >> tree as it obviously isn't stable material, sorry for not catching that >> before. > > Wait a minute. IIRC, Juergen told me last week that this patch fixes a bug > found/assigned by/to him. Juergen? If it is true then I would apply it to > stable. If I am wrong you can drop it. I'm not sure both patches (this one and upstream 457ea3f7e97881f) are needed. I have got a report about a failing boot and with both patches applied the boot is working. I will ask if 457ea3f7e97881f alone works, too. If it doesn't I'll request this patch to be added to stable again. Juergen
--- a/arch/x86/xen/efi.c +++ b/arch/x86/xen/efi.c @@ -54,38 +54,6 @@ static efi_system_table_t efi_systab_xen .tables = EFI_INVALID_TABLE_ADDR /* Initialized later. */ }; -static const struct efi efi_xen __initconst = { - .systab = NULL, /* Initialized later. */ - .runtime_version = 0, /* Initialized later. */ - .mps = EFI_INVALID_TABLE_ADDR, - .acpi = EFI_INVALID_TABLE_ADDR, - .acpi20 = EFI_INVALID_TABLE_ADDR, - .smbios = EFI_INVALID_TABLE_ADDR, - .smbios3 = EFI_INVALID_TABLE_ADDR, - .sal_systab = EFI_INVALID_TABLE_ADDR, - .boot_info = EFI_INVALID_TABLE_ADDR, - .hcdp = EFI_INVALID_TABLE_ADDR, - .uga = EFI_INVALID_TABLE_ADDR, - .uv_systab = EFI_INVALID_TABLE_ADDR, - .fw_vendor = EFI_INVALID_TABLE_ADDR, - .runtime = EFI_INVALID_TABLE_ADDR, - .config_table = EFI_INVALID_TABLE_ADDR, - .get_time = xen_efi_get_time, - .set_time = xen_efi_set_time, - .get_wakeup_time = xen_efi_get_wakeup_time, - .set_wakeup_time = xen_efi_set_wakeup_time, - .get_variable = xen_efi_get_variable, - .get_next_variable = xen_efi_get_next_variable, - .set_variable = xen_efi_set_variable, - .query_variable_info = xen_efi_query_variable_info, - .update_capsule = xen_efi_update_capsule, - .query_capsule_caps = xen_efi_query_capsule_caps, - .get_next_high_mono_count = xen_efi_get_next_high_mono_count, - .reset_system = xen_efi_reset_system, - .set_virtual_address_map = NULL, /* Not used under Xen. */ - .flags = 0 /* Initialized later. */ -}; - static efi_system_table_t __init *xen_efi_probe(void) { struct xen_platform_op op = { @@ -102,7 +70,18 @@ static efi_system_table_t __init *xen_ef /* Here we know that Xen runs on EFI platform. */ - efi = efi_xen; + efi.get_time = xen_efi_get_time; + efi.set_time = xen_efi_set_time; + efi.get_wakeup_time = xen_efi_get_wakeup_time; + efi.set_wakeup_time = xen_efi_set_wakeup_time; + efi.get_variable = xen_efi_get_variable; + efi.get_next_variable = xen_efi_get_next_variable; + efi.set_variable = xen_efi_set_variable; + efi.query_variable_info = xen_efi_query_variable_info; + efi.update_capsule = xen_efi_update_capsule; + efi.query_capsule_caps = xen_efi_query_capsule_caps; + efi.get_next_high_mono_count = xen_efi_get_next_high_mono_count; + efi.reset_system = xen_efi_reset_system; efi_systab_xen.tables = info->cfg.addr; efi_systab_xen.nr_tables = info->cfg.nent;