* [email protected] <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hello, Ingo, Suresh.
>
> On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 01:49:18PM -0700, Suresh Siddha wrote:
> > On Mon, 2011-06-13 at 12:56 -0700, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > > * Suresh Siddha <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > include/linux/stop_machine.h | 11 +++--
> > > > kernel/stop_machine.c | 91
> > > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
> > > > 2 files changed, 93 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > Btw., this is *way* too risky for a -stable backport.
> > >
> >
> > Ingo, we can have a smaller patch (appended) for the -stable. How do you
> > want to go ahead? Take this small patch for both mainline and -stable
> > and the two code cleanup/consolidation patches for -tip (to go into
> > 3.1?). Thanks.
>
> So, here's what I think we should do.
>
> * Polish up this simpler patch and send it for 3.0 through -tip. It's
> slightly scary but not too much and fixes a real bug. After a
> while, we can ask -stable to pull the simple version.
Looks good to me.
> * Work on proper update which drops custom implementation from mtrr
> code for 3.1 window. BTW, even after the recent revisions, I think
> the stop machine change is a bit too hacky. I'll reply to that
> separately.
ok.
Thanks,
Ingo
_______________________________________________
stable mailing list
[email protected]
http://linux.kernel.org/mailman/listinfo/stable
