[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180915014005.GI3821@sasha-vm>
Date: Sat, 15 Sep 2018 01:40:06 +0000
From: Sasha Levin <Alexander.Levin@...rosoft.com>
To: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
CC: "stable@...r.kernel.org" <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH AUTOSEL 4.18 51/92] tools/testing/nvdimm: Fix support for
emulating controller temperature
On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 06:34:43PM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
>On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 6:30 PM, Sasha Levin
><Alexander.Levin@...rosoft.com> wrote:
>> From: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
>>
>> [ Upstream commit e5d772fbe7685aae0dff99f3b54158a0ec32155e ]
>>
>> In addition to populating the value the payload also needs to set the
>> "controller temperature valid" flag.
>>
>> Fixes: cdd77d3e1930 ("nfit, libnvdimm: deprecate the generic SMART ioctl")
>> Signed-off-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <alexander.levin@...rosoft.com>
>> ---
>> tools/testing/nvdimm/test/nfit.c | 3 ++-
>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/tools/testing/nvdimm/test/nfit.c b/tools/testing/nvdimm/test/nfit.c
>> index e2926f72a821..94c3bdf82ff7 100644
>> --- a/tools/testing/nvdimm/test/nfit.c
>> +++ b/tools/testing/nvdimm/test/nfit.c
>> @@ -1308,7 +1308,8 @@ static void smart_init(struct nfit_test *t)
>> | ND_INTEL_SMART_ALARM_VALID
>> | ND_INTEL_SMART_USED_VALID
>> | ND_INTEL_SMART_SHUTDOWN_VALID
>> - | ND_INTEL_SMART_MTEMP_VALID,
>> + | ND_INTEL_SMART_MTEMP_VALID
>> + | ND_INTEL_SMART_CTEMP_VALID,
>> .health = ND_INTEL_SMART_NON_CRITICAL_HEALTH,
>> .media_temperature = 23 * 16,
>> .ctrl_temperature = 25 * 16,
>
>Does no harm, but also does no benefit since this is just unit test
>infrastructure. You may want to blacklist this directory for stable
>checking in the future.
We backport selftests back to stable trees. People run selftests on
stable kernels as well, so it's both important to make sure that a
backport didn't brake anything, and to locate possible missing stable
patches.
It is also the case that backporting selftests can't "break" the kernel.
They are disconnected from the kernel's build process so we can be less
conservative about backporting them.
--
Thanks,
Sasha
Powered by blists - more mailing lists