On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 12:23:04PM -0600, Raul Rangel wrote: > On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 07:09:17PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 10:46:25AM -0600, Raul Rangel wrote: > > > On Tue, May 14, 2019 at 11:19:34AM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > > > On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 11:55:18AM -0600, Raul E Rangel wrote: > > > > > I think we should cherry-pick 41e3efd07d5a02c80f503e29d755aa1bbb4245de > > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/856512/ into 4.14. It fixes a > > > > > potential resource leak when shutting down the request queue. > > > > > > > > Potential meaning "it does happen", or "it can happen if we do this", or > > > > just "maybe it might happen, we really do not know?" > > > It does happen if the AMD SDHCI patches are cherry-picked into 4.14. > > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/5/1/398 > > > > Why are those patches somehow being required to be added to 4.14.y? If > > they are not added, is all fine? > I was just thinking we would backport the patches to fix this AMD SDHCI > hardware bug, but I guess we don't need to. Has anyone asked for those to be backported? Does anyone require them to be? What's keeping users from using a newer kernel that have this specific hardware issue? Trying to apply patches to a stable kernel due to an issue that is not even in that stable kernel is crazy. No wonder I am totally confused... thanks, greg k-h
