> ... I need git commit ids for the > upstream patches that went into Linus's tree, and they should only be > bug fixes or other stuff that is applicable for -stable. git cherry-pick doesn't preserve the original commit id, but I'll be happy to go back and add them to the commit messages. > > commit 935558a7fefe0a307618857ad8a06e8a485b3b47 > > Author: Len Brown <len.brown@xxxxxxxxx> > > Date: Wed Jul 7 00:12:03 2010 -0400 > > > > intel_idle: add initial Sandy Bridge support > > > > Signed-off-by: Len Brown <len.brown@xxxxxxxxx> > > Is this patch really ok for -stable? What is the git commit id of it in > Linus's tree? It is okay for your local neighborhood enterprise release, so I figured it is okay for stable. > > commit 1768bd405dc30d4db74af5eb693d6c2d3389c5a6 > > Author: Len Brown <len.brown@xxxxxxxxx> > > Date: Fri Oct 15 21:23:25 2010 -0400 > > > > intel_idle: delete bogus data from cpuidle_state.power_usage > > > > The mW data in this field is a total fabrication > > and serves no purpose other than to mislead > > those who might see it in sysfs. Delete it. > > > > Signed-off-by: Len Brown <len.brown@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > commit 645fd1ddc110eea7ab596b6fa27add5cff912e84 > > Author: Len Brown <len.brown@xxxxxxxxx> > > Date: Fri Oct 15 20:43:06 2010 -0400 > > > > intel_idle: simplify test for leave_mm() > > > > A run-time test to invoke leave_mm() for the deepest > > supported C-state is redundant, since the appropriate > > C-states already have flags with CPUIDLE_FLAG_TLB_FLUSHED set. > > > > Signed-off-by: Len Brown <len.brown@xxxxxxxxx> > > Is this patch really for -stable? Yes. It fixes a bug in the original driver that was due to an oversight by yours truly. The bug causes a performance degragation as compared to acpi_idle. > > commit 27a52cf2d75b81e762c8fc41fd8fca3dac2aa8ca > > Author: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Date: Fri Sep 17 15:36:40 2010 -0700 > > > > x86, mwait: Move mwait constants to a common header file > > > > We have MWAIT constants spread across three different .c files, for no > > good reason. Move them all into a common header file. > > > > Signed-off-by: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Reviewed-by: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Cc: Len Brown <lenb@xxxxxxxxxx> > > LKML-Reference: <tip-*@git.kernel.org> > > Why would this be ok for -stable? It is a trivial patch that is syntax only. I think it makes sense for -stable because it allows the paches that are on top of it to be identical in upstream and in -stable. If you leave out the trival syntax patch, I think it adds unnecessary risk of backporting error for subsequent patches. > While I understand you would like the driver to be the same in both > kernel versions, you still have to follow the normal -stable rules. I've now read Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt I'll be happy to add upstream commit id's, as I've done before when I e-mail you plain patches. I do not advocate deleting the trivial syntax patches, because their presence allows stable to match upstream almost exactly, and that significantly reduces the risk of backporting error of subsequent patches. I think that has significant value and near zero risk, which is important when optimizing for maintenance. thanks, Len Brown, Intel Open Source Technology Center _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
