linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] platform/x86: pmc_atom: Add Lex 3I380D industrial PC to critclk

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Mon, 6 May 2019 17:59:25 +0300
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To:     Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>
Cc:     Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>,
        Darren Hart <dvhart@...radead.org>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andy@...radead.org>,
        Kai Heng Feng <kai.heng.feng@...onical.com>,
        Platform Driver <platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Semyon Verchenko <semverchenko@...tor-ts.ru>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] platform/x86: pmc_atom: Add Lex 3I380D industrial PC to
 critclk_systems DMI table

On Mon, May 6, 2019 at 5:47 PM Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 06-05-19 14:38, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 6:01 PM Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> The Lex 3I380D industrial PC has 4 ethernet controllers on board
> >> which need pmc_plt_clk0 - 3 to function, add it to the critclk_systems
> >> DMI table, so that drivers/clk/x86/clk-pmc-atom.c will mark the clocks
> >> as CLK_CRITICAL and they will not get turned off.
> >>
> >
> > Acked-by: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
> > supposedly to go via CLK tree.
> >
> > P.S. If you want it through PDx86, I need immutable branch / tag from CLK.
>
> Stephen added the patches this depends on to his fixes branch, so they
> are in the 5.1 / Torvald's master branch, since we are now in the 5.2 merge
> window, you should be able to cleanly apply this directly.

We don't do back merges, so, our base is v5.1-rc1. Does it mean the
commit in question is in v5.1-rc1?
AFAICS it was appeared in v5.1-rc5.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko