linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/5] PCI: PM: Cleanups related to power state changes

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]

Message-ID: <20191105223521.GA42216@google.com>
Date:   Tue, 5 Nov 2019 16:35:21 -0600
From:   Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org>
To:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
Cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux PCI <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux PM <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
        Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] PCI: PM: Cleanups related to power state changes

On Tue, Nov 05, 2019 at 12:28:47PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Tuesday, November 5, 2019 11:11:57 AM CET Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > This series rearranges some PCI power management code to make it somewhat
> > easier to follow and explicitly consolidate the power-up (transitions to
> > D0) code path.
> > 
> > It is not intended to change the functionality of the code.
> 
> This series applies on top of 5.4-rc6 with your pci/pm-2 branch from today
> merged on top of it.
> 
> I guess I can make it apply on top of pci/pm-2, but there were some PCI PM
> changes in 5.4-rc later than -rc1 in that area and they need to be taken
> into account anyway.

I applied the commits from pci/pm-2 to pci/pm (pci/pm-2 was really
just to get the 0-day robot to build test it).

pci/pm is based on v5.4-rc1, which doesn't have 45144d42f299 ("PCI:
PM: Fix pci_power_up()"), which appeared in -rc4.

All my branches are based on -rc1.  I *could* rebase them all to -rc4,
but that's quite a bit of work and affects Lorenzo as well, so I'd
rather not.  What's the git expert's way of doing this?

I guess worst case I could rebase this series to apply on pci/pm
(-rc1-based), accept that Linus will see a conflict, and resolve it
during his merge.

Bjorn