[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <c4b0cd93-767c-a778-6a38-0e4d981506d3@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2022 22:37:11 +0100
From: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Jithu Joseph <jithu.joseph@...el.com>
Cc: markgross@...nel.org, tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com,
dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, x86@...nel.org, hpa@...or.com,
gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, ashok.raj@...el.com,
tony.luck@...el.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org, patches@...ts.linux.dev,
ravi.v.shankar@...el.com, thiago.macieira@...el.com,
athenas.jimenez.gonzalez@...el.com, sohil.mehta@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/14] IFS multi test image support and misc changes
Hi Boris,
On 11/10/22 10:59, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 07, 2022 at 02:53:09PM -0800, Jithu Joseph wrote:
>> Changes in v2
>> - Rebased ontop of v6.1-rc4
>> Boris
>> - Moved exported functions (microcode_sanity_check(),
>> find_matching_signature ) from microcode/intel.c to cpu/intel.c
>> (patch4,6)
>> - Removed microcode metadata specific code changes to
>> microcode_sanity_check() (patch6)
>> - Moved find_meta_data() from common to IFS driver (Patch 8)
>
> What's the upstreaming plan here - I'm assuming I should take the
> microcode patches through the tip tree?
>
> Or should I take the whole thing through tip so that there's no
> confusion and having to sync and share branches between trees?
I have just reviewed all the platform/x86/intel/ifs changes
and they all look good to me.
I think it is the best and easiest if you just take the whole
branch.
I don't have any changes pending under drivers/platform/x86/intel/ifs
so there should not be any conflicts.
Regards,
Hans
Powered by blists - more mailing lists