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: <20140905214758.GC30221@kroah.com>
Date:	Fri, 5 Sep 2014 14:47:58 -0700
From:	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:	Brian Norris <computersforpeace@...il.com>
Cc:	Francis Moreau <francis.moro@...il.com>, stable@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
	Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3.10.y+] PM / sleep: Use valid_state() for
 platform-dependent sleep states only

On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 12:45:12AM -0700, Brian Norris wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 08:29:09AM +0200, Francis Moreau wrote:
> > On 09/04/2014 11:21 PM, Brian Norris wrote:
> [...]
> > > Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>
> > > Cc: <stable@...r.kernel.org> # 3.10+: 27ddcc6596e5: PM / sleep: Add state field to pm_states[] entries
> > > Cc: <stable@...r.kernel.org> # 3.10+
> > > ---
> > > This is a backport request for these two commits upstream:
> > > 
> > >     27ddcc6596e5 PM / sleep: Add state field to pm_states[] entries
> > >     43e8317b0bba PM / sleep: Use valid_state() for platform-dependent sleep states only
> > > 
> > 
> > Wouldn't it be cleaner to have 2 separate backports then ?
> 
> The first is purely a dependency for the second. It has no value on its
> own. So I thought the above form made sense and followed the process
> mentioned in Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt.
> 
> Admittedly, it's a little asymmetric. But I really don't know what the
> "best" option is, since I'd prefer not having to send around any patch
> text at all, unless the backport is not trivial (these apply cleanly).

If they apply cleanly, then just list the git commit ids, and I can take
care of the rest.

Don't merge patches together, it just causes problems and makes it
harder to track what is going on.

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/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ