[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <SJ1PR11MB60837A038C5D87ECF3768735FC2E9@SJ1PR11MB6083.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2022 23:01:21 +0000
From: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>
To: "Mehta, Sohil" <sohil.mehta@...el.com>,
"Joseph, Jithu" <jithu.joseph@...el.com>
CC: "tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
"bp@...en8.de" <bp@...en8.de>,
"dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com" <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>, "hpa@...or.com" <hpa@...or.com>,
"gregkh@...uxfoundation.org" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
"Raj, Ashok" <ashok.raj@...el.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org"
<platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org>,
"patches@...ts.linux.dev" <patches@...ts.linux.dev>,
"Shankar, Ravi V" <ravi.v.shankar@...el.com>,
"Macieira, Thiago" <thiago.macieira@...el.com>,
"Jimenez Gonzalez, Athenas" <athenas.jimenez.gonzalez@...el.com>,
"hdegoede@...hat.com" <hdegoede@...hat.com>,
"markgross@...nel.org" <markgross@...nel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 03/14] platform/x86/intel/ifs: return a more appropriate
Error code
> Do the first 3 patches need a 'Fixes' tag? Or is the idea here that the
> feature isn't truly enabled so everything before removing the BROKEN tag
> will be considered together?
No point in back porting a "Fix" to a stable release that still marks the
driver as BROKEN
-Tony
Powered by blists - more mailing lists