linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 5.11 079/104] drm/amdgpu: enable only one high prio compute queue

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: <489d8a9e-1e24-82b8-7738-5e93aa1aabf4@amd.com>
Date:   Fri, 5 Mar 2021 16:57:36 +0100
From:   Nirmoy <nirmodas@....com>
To:     "Deucher, Alexander" <Alexander.Deucher@....com>,
        "Koenig, Christian" <Christian.Koenig@....com>,
        Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>,
        "Das, Nirmoy" <Nirmoy.Das@....com>
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "stable@...r.kernel.org" <stable@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5.11 079/104] drm/amdgpu: enable only one high prio
 compute queue


On 3/5/21 4:40 PM, Deucher, Alexander wrote:
> [AMD Public Use]
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Koenig, Christian <Christian.Koenig@....com>
>> Sent: Friday, March 5, 2021 10:35 AM
>> To: Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>; Deucher, Alexander
>> <Alexander.Deucher@....com>
>> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>; linux-
>> kernel@...r.kernel.org; stable@...r.kernel.org; Das, Nirmoy
>> <Nirmoy.Das@....com>
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH 5.11 079/104] drm/amdgpu: enable only one high prio
>> compute queue
>>
>> Am 05.03.21 um 16:31 schrieb Sasha Levin:
>>> On Fri, Mar 05, 2021 at 03:27:00PM +0000, Deucher, Alexander wrote:
>>>> Not sure if Sasha picked that up or not. Would need to check that. If
>>>> it's not, this patch should be dropped.
>>> Yes, it went in via autosel. I can drop it if it's not needed.
>>>
>> IIRC this patch was created *before* the feature which needs it was merged.
>> So it isn't a bug fix, but rather just a prerequisite for a new feature.
>>
>> Because of this it should only be merged into an older kernel if the new
>> features is back ported as well.
>>
>> Alex do you agree that we can drop it?
> I think so, but I don't remember the exact sequence.  @Das, Nirmoy?


Yes, I agree with Christian. We should not backport it alone.


Nirmoy


>
> Alex