Re: fix for CRTC mutex corruption

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 





On Tue, 29 Oct 2013, Daniel Vetter wrote:

Oh right, I've forgotten that between the review and writing the mail
;-) I guess we could try to bend the stable rules a bit and just
submit all 6. It's a regression fix after all, and at least personally
I prefer the most minimal backports to avoid diverging between
upstream and stable kernel branches.

But I guess that's Dave's call to make.


How about taking the patch series into drm-next and marking patch #6 only with CC: stable@ and specifying hashes of the prerequisite 5 patches for cherry-pick?

I think that is fully compliant with stable rules (at least that's my understanding of line 41 of Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt) and would not be bending anything.

I presume that if this is acceptable, Dave would have to add stable@ tags for cherry-picking because hash values may change in his tree if drm-next changes relative to my base (which is state of drm-next as of yesterday PM).

-- Ilija
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel




[Index of Archives]     [Linux DRI Users]     [Linux Intel Graphics]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]
  Powered by Linux