linux-kernel - Re: (subset) [PATCH v4 0/5] arm64: dts: qcom: sc8280xp: PCIe fixes and GICv3 ITS enable

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: <ZfqhCKoEL4XGRs7T@hovoldconsulting.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2024 09:40:40 +0100
From: Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
Cc: Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
	Johan Hovold <johan+linaro@...nel.org>,
	Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>,
	Lorenzo Pieralisi <lpieralisi@...nel.org>,
	Krzysztof Wilczyński <kw@...ux.com>,
	Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
	Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
	Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org>,
	linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: (subset) [PATCH v4 0/5] arm64: dts: qcom: sc8280xp: PCIe fixes
 and GICv3 ITS enable

On Wed, Mar 20, 2024 at 09:24:54AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 20/03/2024 09:18, Johan Hovold wrote:

> > Perhaps you should not comment before reading up on the history of this
> > series.
> > 
> > This was all intended for 6.9, but merging was stalled for a number of
> > reasons so here we are. The patches were also going in through different
> > trees, so patch 4/5 is the first Qualcomm SoC patch.
> 
> Again, well, you sent it at few days before merge window, so how do you
> imagine this being applied for v6.9 and still fulfilling "few linux-next
> cycles before merge window" requirement? Especially that arm-soc cut off
> is much earlier :/. I talk about patch 5, of course, because that is not
> a fix (at least not marked as one). Don't expect in general a arms-co
> patch to be applied four days before merge window, thus the actual fix -
> patch #4 - should be split.

At the time there was still hope that there may be an rc8, and the patch
in question had been used by a large number of X13s users for several
weeks, which is a lot more testing than the average Qualcomm patch
receives, whether it's in linux-next or not.

And patch 5 depends on the earlier patches in the series so it belongs
in the series, which was also initially posted long before the merge
window.

I'm sure Bjorn A can handle this in general, even if he failed to notice
the CC stable tag or had other reasons for applying the fix for 6.10
instead of 6.9.

Johan