linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/6] acpi-cpufreq and powernow-k8 fixes

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: <20130121000402.GA19343@pd.tnic>
Date:	Mon, 21 Jan 2013 01:04:02 +0100
From:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
Cc:	André Przywara <andre@...rep.de>,
	Leonid Isaev <lisaev@...il.iu.edu>,
	Tom Gundersen <teg@...m.no>, cpufreq@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] acpi-cpufreq and powernow-k8 fixes

On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 03:18:11PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> Well, it all looks reasonable to me.
>
> I suppose you'd like it to go into v3.8 plus v3.7-stable, right?

Well, sort of.

Patch 0001 which you've already taken and tagged for 3.7-stable and is
on its way to 3.8 is fine since it fixes a bug.

The rest are, IMHO, more or less annoyances fixes which could easily
wait for 3.9 and maybe be backported if there really is an issue. Also,
they'd see a lot more testing this way. Because in at least 99% of the
cases, acpi-cpufreq and powernow-k8 are modules and the handoff works
there.

This is at least how I see it, you tell me whether it makes sense or
not.

Thanks.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine.
--
--
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/