[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20180316143537.0d49a76ec48ec0ab034af93b@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2018 14:35:37 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Jerome Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>
Cc: linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
stable@...r.kernel.org, Ralph Campbell <rcampbell@...dia.com>,
John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>,
Evgeny Baskakov <ebaskakov@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/14] mm/hmm: fix header file if/else/endif maze
On Fri, 16 Mar 2018 17:18:02 -0400 Jerome Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 02:09:59PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Fri, 16 Mar 2018 15:14:07 -0400 jglisse@...hat.com wrote:
> >
> > > From: Jérôme Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>
> > >
> > > The #if/#else/#endif for IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_HMM) were wrong.
> >
> > "were wrong" is not a sufficient explanation of the problem, especially
> > if we're requesting a -stable backport. Please fully describe the
> > effects of a bug when fixing it?
>
> Build issue (compilation failure) if you have multiple includes of
> hmm.h through different headers is the most obvious issue. So it
> will be very obvious with any big driver that include the file in
> different headers.
That doesn't seem to warrant a -stable backport? The developer of such
a driver will simply fix the headers?
> I can respin with that. Sorry again for not being more explanatory
> it is always hard for me to figure what is not obvious to others.
I updated the changelog, no respin needed.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists