[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <MWHPR03MB26698BDA35ADE47E2C842AABBF770@MWHPR03MB2669.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2017 10:24:32 +0000
From: Dexuan Cui <decui@...rosoft.com>
To: "gregkh@...uxfoundation.org" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
CC: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>,
"driverdev-devel@...uxdriverproject.org"
<driverdev-devel@...uxdriverproject.org>,
KY Srinivasan <kys@...rosoft.com>,
Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@...rosoft.com>,
Stephen Hemminger <sthemmin@...rosoft.com>,
"olaf@...fle.de" <olaf@...fle.de>,
Rolf Neugebauer <rolf.neugebauer@...ker.com>,
"jasowang@...hat.com" <jasowang@...hat.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"apw@...onical.com" <apw@...onical.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] Drivers: hv: vmbus: finally fix
hv_need_to_signal_on_read()
> From: gregkh@...uxfoundation.org [mailto:gregkh@...uxfoundation.org]
> To: Dexuan Cui <decui@...rosoft.com>
> >
> > v4.4.44 needs 2 patches, i.e. a389fcfd2cb5, and this patch (which is not in
> > Linus's tree yet). Only backporting the first patch immediately is not enough
> > and is also improper IMO, because the first patch introduces a new issue,
> > which is being resolved by this patch. So my understanding is that I should
> > backport the 2 patches together.
>
> Ok, that makes a bit more sense, thanks. I'll wait for your "real"
> patch to hit Linus's tree then.
>
> greg k-h
Hi Greg,
I expect this patch (i.e. the "real" patch) would go in your char-misc tree first,
then it would be merged into Linus's tree, as we usually did.
IMO this is an important fix, but it's not so urgent that Linus would notice
it and pick it up directly.
Thanks,
-- Dexuan
Powered by blists - more mailing lists