Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 20 Jun 2012 00:19:56 +0200 | From | Borislav Petkov <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] x86, microcode: Make reload interface per system |
| |
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 03:57:36PM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> I was wondering whether it would be worthwhile to backport the new ABI > for the Debian 3.2 kernel or not. Probably not.
Nope, changing released kernels' ABI is a no-no.
> Backporting to 3.2 and 3.0 is straigthforward, however it will look > nasty as one has to "inappropriately touch" the cpu sysdev class to > get the attribute group directly connected to /sys/devices/system/cpu. > > I did notice there were no stable backports of the error unwind during > module init, but that one is a very rarely used codepath. Maybe worth > to backport a fix to stable, though.
Yeah, stable rules say we only backport regression fixes and although missing error unwind is a small regression, I've never heard of it causing trouble.
> Well, my ack is unimportant in the "this is not an area of the kernel > I have any authority to ack things" sense. But we don't have a > "I-wanna-that-by:" or even a "Thumbs-up-by:"...
Which reminds me, I forgot to add your tags to the patches, sorry.
@hpa: Would you please add Henrique's {Tested,Acked}-by tags to the patches? Thanks.
> > Thanks for review and testing, I'll send out the patches soon. > > Thank you for addressing these issues and writing the patches!
Sure, absolutely! :-)
-- Regards/Gruss, Boris.
Advanced Micro Devices GmbH Einsteinring 24, 85609 Dornach GM: Alberto Bozzo Reg: Dornach, Landkreis Muenchen HRB Nr. 43632 WEEE Registernr: 129 19551
| |