[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1430782807.4113.210.camel@decadent.org.uk>
Date: Tue, 05 May 2015 00:40:07 +0100
From: Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.org.uk>
To: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>
Cc: lizf@...nel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Zefan Li <lizefan@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3.4 033/176] KVM: s390: flush CPU on load control
On Thu, 2015-04-09 at 12:17 +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> Am 09.04.2015 um 10:44 schrieb lizf@...nel.org:
> > From: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>
> >
> > 3.4.107-rc1 review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
> >
> > ------------------
> >
> >
> > commit 2dca485f8740208604543c3960be31a5dd3ea603 upstream.
>
> Hmmm, I just realized that this patch only makes a difference with
>
> commit d3d692c82e4ed79ae7c85f8825ccfdb7d11819da ("KVM: s390: implement KVM_REQ_TLB_FLUSH and make use of it")
>
> It should not hurt to have this patch as far as I can tell,
> but it makes no difference. This is also true for other
> stable versions < 3.18 - sorry for noticing it that late.
>
> commit d3d692c82e4ed79ae7c85f8825ccfdb7d11819da on the other hand
> is not that easy to backport into Linux versions < 3.16.
>
> So maybe just drop this patch?
I also mistakenly applied this to 3.2 and will revert it in the next
update.
Ben.
--
Ben Hutchings
Once a job is fouled up, anything done to improve it makes it worse.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (812 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists