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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <652cf483-6098-5e0-94ef-fdca344fa2ac@linux.intel.com> Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2023 20:14:27 +0200 (EET) From: Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@...ux.intel.com> To: "David E. Box" <david.e.box@...ux.intel.com> cc: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>, rajvi.jingar@...ux.intel.com, platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] Intel PMC Core GBE LTR regression fix On Fri, 22 Dec 2023, David E. Box wrote: > This patch series addresses the network performance regression caused by > commit 804951203aa5 ("platform/x86:intel/pmc: Combine core_init() and > core_configure()"). > > Unfortunately, the regression is included in the recent Lunar Lake and > Arrow Lake support patches in the review branch. Patches 1 and 2 remove the > LTR ignore without a fix. They may be folded into the respective enabling > patches indicated in the changelog. This is done so that the next patches > fixing the regression can be backported to stable kernels with fewer, if > any, conflicts. > > Patches 3 and 4 provide the support needed for Patch 5 to move the GBE LTR > ignore from probe-time to suspend/resume time. All three carry the same > Fixes tag so that the stable kernels can pick them up without causing a > separate suspend-time PC10 regression. > > Patches 6 and 7 then add the LTR suspend/resume fix for Arrow Lake and > Lunar Lake. Of course, they cannot be folded into the enabling patches > unless the LTR fixes (3-5) are applied before. Sorry about this :(. Wow, this is messy... So the best order would be placing 3-5 before these Arrow Lake and Lunar Lake commits in for-next: 119652b855e6 ("platform/x86/intel/pmc: Add Lunar Lake M support to intel_pmc_core driver") f34dcf397286 ("platform/x86/intel/pmc: Add Arrow Lake S support to intel_pmc_core driver") ? And then folding 1-2 and 6-7 into those respective commits? It makes me wonder though why those two commits couldn't have been delayed slightly to get these fixes included first... :-/ -- i.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists