Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 2 Dec 2015 08:53:38 -0800 | From | Greg Kroah-Hartman <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] tpm_tis: Clean up force module parameter |
| |
On Wed, Dec 02, 2015 at 09:21:47AM +0100, Uwe Kleine-König wrote: > Hello, > > Cc += gregkh > > On Wed, Dec 02, 2015 at 10:11:14AM +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 01, 2015 at 03:22:23PM -0700, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > > > On Tue, Dec 01, 2015 at 11:33:51PM +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > > > > > > I went through the patches and didn't see anything that would shock me > > > > enough not to apply the patches in the current if they also work when > > > > tested *but* are these release critical for Linux v4.4? > > > > > > > > I got a bit confused about the discussion that was going on about "where > > > > to fix the probe" crash whether or not both it should be fixed in both > > > > places. > > > > > > I'm also confused by that.. > > > > > > It sounds like force=1 is broken in 4.4 right now - do we care? Should > > > we fix this by using Martin's patch? > > > > > > These changes are complex enough they really shouldn't go into 4.4 > > > unless absolutely necessary. > > > > The reasons I'm asking this are: > > > > * I'm planning to do v4.5 pull request soon. > > * If this need to be get this into v4.4, we should act fast. Given the > > complexity of the changes I'd not recommend that unless it is a life > > and death question. > > I'd say we should repair b8b2c7d845d5 ("base/platform: assert that > dev_pm_domain callbacks are called unconditionally") for 4.4-rc$next and > live with the problem that the tpm driver had since long another > release.
I was going to queue up Subject: [PATCH] base/platform: fix panic when probe function is NULL
for 4.4-final, unless you all object to that.
thanks,
greg k-h
| |