On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 08:45:46AM -0600, Mathieu Poirier wrote: > On 29 May 2018 at 18:28, Leo Yan <leo.yan@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi Mathieu, > > > > On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 10:04:49AM -0600, Mathieu Poirier wrote: > > > > [...] > > > >> > As now this patch is big with more complex logic, so I consider to > >> > split it into small patches: > >> > > >> > - Define CS_ETM_INVAL_ADDR; > >> > - Fix for CS_ETM_TRACE_ON packet; > >> > - Fix for exception packet; > >> > > >> > Does this make sense for you? I have concern that this patch is a > >> > fixing patch, so not sure after spliting patches will introduce > >> > trouble for applying them for other stable kernels ... > >> > >> Reverse the order: > >> > >> - Fix for CS_ETM_TRACE_ON packet; > >> - Fix for exception packet; > >> - Define CS_ETM_INVAL_ADDR; > >> > >> But you may not need to - see next comment. > > > > From the discussion context, I think here 'you may not need to' is > > referring to my concern for applying patches on stable kernel, so I > > should take this patch series as an enhancement and don't need to > > consider much for stable kernel. > > Yes, that is what I meant. Thanks for confirmation, will send new patch series according to the discussion. [...] Thanks, Leo Yan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
