linux-kernel - Re: [ 67/89] drm/radeon: properly track the crtc not_enabled case evergreen_mc

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20121206181452.GA14700@kroah.com>
Date:	Thu, 6 Dec 2012 10:14:52 -0800
From:	Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:	Josh Boyer <jwboyer@...il.com>
Cc:	"Deucher, Alexander" <Alexander.Deucher@....com>,
	Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.org.uk>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"stable@...r.kernel.org" <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
	"akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk" <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [ 67/89] drm/radeon: properly track the crtc not_enabled case
 evergreen_mc_stop()

On Tue, Dec 04, 2012 at 09:35:04AM -0500, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 6:40 PM, Deucher, Alexander
> <Alexander.Deucher@....com> wrote:
> >> > The original patches should go into 3.6 kernels as well:
> >> >
> >> http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git;a=commitdiff;h=4
> >> a15903db02026728d0cf2755c6fabae16b8db6a
> >> >
> >> http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git;a=commitdiff;h=6
> >> 2444b7462a2b98bc78d68736c03a7c4e66ba7e2
> >> >
> >> http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git;a=commitdiff;h=8
> >> 04cc4a0ad3a896ca295f771a28c6eb36ced7903
> >> >
> >> > I've been meaning to follow up on it, but I haven't had the time.  Do I need
> >> to send explicit patches to stable@...r or can I just ask the above commits
> >> be cherrypicked to 3.6?
> >> >
> >>
> >> Normally the CC tag works.  Not entirely sure why it didn't for the one
> >> patch I asked about.  The other two commits you've highlighted here are
> >> lacking any sort of stable tag, so you'd have to pipe up here about them.
> >
> > The patches were not initially a bug fix per se, so I didn't cc stable.  It was only later that I got reports of the patches fixing issues for some people. Normally I add the stable cc if the patch is a bug fix.
> >
> >>
> >> I went ahead and tried the cherry-pick myself on top of 3.6.9, in the
> >> order you specified above.  The 62444b7462a has a trivial conflict coming
> >> back.  I've attached an mbox with these three patches.  If you want to
> >> give them a glance over and OK them, that would be great.
> >
> > They look good to me.  Thanks!
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@....com>
> 
> Thanks Alex.
> 
> We've had a couple of users successfully test a kernel with these 3
> patches applied for rhbz 855275.
> 
> Greg, is the mbox enough or would you like me to send them separately
> to the list?

No need, I've used the mbox's patches, thanks.

greg k-h
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/