Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 22 Jan 2010 09:48:55 -0800 | From | "H. Peter Anvin" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH -v3 0/5] x86, cacheinfo, amd: L3 Cache Index Disable fixes |
| |
On 01/22/2010 09:40 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote: >>> >>> Those patches are also good -stable candidates. >> >> Hmmm... I'm not sure I see a strong justification for a late -rc push >> into Linus/stable push for for these... I think you would have to >> explicitly make the case if you want them to be considered as such. > > Well, on the one hand, they fix real bugs in the L3 cache index disable > code and since they're bugfixes, they are eligible late -rc candidates. >
Bugfixes are *early* -rc candidates. Regression fixes are *late* -rc candidates, at least that seems to be the policy Linus currently implements. -stable seems to use slightly less strict criteria (the whole point is that -final needs to be a stabilization point, backported fixes/drivers can then come onto a stable base) which is why you seem some patches which are "straight to .1".
> On the other hand, however and more importantly, the machines which > have that feature are not selling yet so postponing the patches for the > next merge window is still ok. I'll backport them then to .32 for the > distro kernels and .33 and I think we are going to be fine this way. > > So queueing them for .34 is still fine with me, thanks.
OK. You can check with -stable if they want to take the backport post-.33.
-hpa
-- H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf.
| |