[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <588095CE.4010601@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2017 05:32:46 -0500
From: Prarit Bhargava <prarit@...hat.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
CC: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Harish Chegondi <harish.chegondi@...el.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>, Kan Liang <kan.liang@...el.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Vince Weaver <vincent.weaver@...ne.edu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4.9 033/120] perf/x86/intel/uncore: Fix hardcoded socket
0 assumption in the Haswell init code
On 01/18/2017 05:25 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Prarit Bhargava <prarit@...hat.com> wrote:
>
>> 4.9 is broken and requires additional patches beyond this patch. Applying this
>> patch to 4.9 stable without those additional fixes will result in kernel panics
>> on some Haswell systems that boot on random cores.
>
> Could you list the patches that are required? It would be nice to backport all
> required fixes to v4.9.
>
Yeah, I'm going to do that once I get the system back. I have a feeling that
just the two additional patches are required but I want to make sure before I
post anything.
P.
> Thanks,
>
> Ingo
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists