Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 13 Jun 2010 08:52:43 +0200 | From | Borislav Petkov <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] x86, AMD: Extend support to future families |
| |
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com> Date: Sat, Jun 12, 2010 at 02:22:09PM -0400
> On 06/11/2010 09:15 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote: > > > > Not yet. And I'm assuming you're driving at tagging it for -stable? > > If yes, I think a stable tag makes sense since this way the distros > > will pick it up more easily and we most definitely will need to do the > > backport later otherwise. > > > > Do you need another version with the stable tag resent or is it easier > > for you to edit the commit message of the one you have already? > > > > No, I'm not -- Linus is being really snippy about wanting regressions > only this cycle, which this is not.
Yeah, so I heard :)
> Once .35 is out you can talk to Greg about -stable.
Right, so this is clearly .36 merge window material - I just thought I should get it out as early as possible so that it gets tested.
And by the way, how about a tag which says which kernel is the patch aimed at so that maintainers know what should go where. I mean, with those gazillion patches on lkml one doesn't always know which is regression, which is a new feature but should go in earlier so that it catches the next merge window etc? I.e., something like:
Aimed-at: 2.6.36+
or for regressions
Aimed-at: 2.6.35-rc3
and maybe even a bug info
Fixes: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=....
I'm afraid this is starting to sound like Ingo's Impact: tag, at least semantically, which didn't get accepted. Hmm, anyway, I'll try adding such an information in later patches.
Thanks.
-- Regards/Gruss, Boris.
Operating Systems Research Center Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
| |