On Fri, Mar 21, 2025 at 01:36:55PM +0900, Rakie Kim wrote: > > Patch 1 and Patch 2 are closely related, and I believe that both patches > need to be combined to fully support the functionality. > > Initially, I thought that Patch 1 was the fix for the original issue and > considered it the candidate for a backport. > However, upon further reflection, I believe that all changes in Patch 1 > through Patch 3 are necessary to fully address the underlying problem. > > Therefore, I now think it makes more sense to merge Patch 1 and Patch 2 > into a single patch, then renumber the current Patch 3 as Patch 2, > and treat the entire set as a proper -stable backport candidate. > > I'd appreciate your thoughts on this suggestion. > > Rakie > All of this is fine, but it doesn't fix the bug in LTS kernels :] It would be nice to do that too, since you identified it. ~Gregory
