[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wjNhQsT2h0M25dDELgaCfkWYBGx_5gQw=yEM10uTO4Ycw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2019 09:55:36 -0800
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-efi <linux-efi@...r.kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] EFI fix
On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 6:22 AM Ard Biesheuvel
<ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org> wrote:
>
> I was hoping we could merge this patch (so we can backport it), but
> resolve the conflict by dropping the kmemleak_ignore() again [..]
Well, we'd drop the new #include line also, since it would be
pointless without the kmemleak_ignore().
End result: there would be nothing left. Better not to merge it at all.
It's easy enough to backport, and just say "done differently upstream
in commit 80424b02d42b ("efi: Reduce the amount of memblock
reservations for persistent allocations").
The stable tree doesn't require that the *same* commits be upstream,
it only requires that the fixes be upstream and Greg&al want a pointer
to the upstream fix just so that they know they're not fixing
something that might still be broken upstream.
See for example (just random googling)
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git/commit/?id=37435f7e80ef9adc32a69013c18f135e3f434244
which shows that "fixed differently upstream" case and points to why.
Linus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists