[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200111130604.GB23583@zn.tnic>
Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2020 14:06:04 +0100
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>
Cc: Jan H. Schönherr <jschoenh@...zon.de>,
Yazen Ghannam <yazen.ghannam@....com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-edac@...r.kernel.org,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/6] x86/mce: Take action on UCNA/Deferred errors again
On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 10:45:33AM -0800, Luck, Tony wrote:
> That's a tricky question. We have changing behavior (UCNA pages offlined,
> then a few kernel versions stopped doing this, now we are going to start
> doing it again. But is it really a _BUG_ that needs backporting to stable?
> I'm leaning towards "no it isn't".
I think the same, so let's not. We can always backport it later, if it
turns out that it is needed.
> But could perhaps be convinced to change my mind if somebody has a
> good reason for wanting it there.
Yah.
> Is there something to put in the tags to stop this being autoselected
> for backport because it has a Fixes: tag?
I don't think so.
What we could do is write the "Fixes:" tag in free text in the commit
message so that tools don't pick up on it.
I'll reply to the other thing below in a separate mail.
Thx.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
Powered by blists - more mailing lists