[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CA+55aFx436=k_jOUqXHt_yL6Tg-B1GjhPa5rRNFKvb_vijjp=Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 2016 11:28:26 -0800
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
Mingwei Shi <mingwei.shi@...el.com>,
"Fu, Borun" <borun.fu@...el.com>,
"Gross, Mark" <mark.gross@...el.com>,
Andrew Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>, Su Tao <tao.su@...el.com>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Qiuxu Zhuo <qiuxu.zhuo@...el.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@...hat.com>,
"Wang, Frank" <frank.wang@...el.com>,
"linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org"
<linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [tip:x86/urgent] x86/entry: Restore traditional SYSENTER calling convention
On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 10:48 AM, H. Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com> wrote:
>
> Linus has frequently stated that if it is something that is critical
> enough for stable, it is critical enough for final. Linus will decide
> if an additional -rc is needed for that reason.
So it would have been good to have it in an -rc, but at the same time
I'm not particularly worried about this one.
It's not like it's complicated, and I'm assuming it got tested and
passed all our current test-cases (which are much more complete than
anything we've ever had historically).
Linus
--
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