On 1/23/23 11:49 AM, Dennis Dalessandro wrote: > On 1/22/23 4:14 AM, Leon Romanovsky wrote: >> On Fri, Jan 20, 2023 at 12:50:35PM -0500, Dennis Dalessandro wrote: >>> On 1/20/23 12:42 PM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: >>>> On Fri, Jan 20, 2023 at 07:09:43PM +0200, Leon Romanovsky wrote: >>>> >>>>> Backmerge will cause to the situation where features are brought to -rc. >>>>> The cherry-pick will be: >>>>> 1. Revert [PATCH for-next 2/7] IB/hfi1: Assign npages earlier] from -next >>>>> 2. Apply [PATCH for-next 2/7] IB/hfi1: Assign npages earlier] to -rc >>>> >>>> You don't need to revert, we just need to merge a RC release to -next >>>> and deal with the conflict, if any. >>> >>> Thanks this sounds like a good way to go. >> >> You talked about broken -rc, but here wants to fix -next. >> https://lore.kernel.org/all/bce1ab36-66e4-465c-e051-94e397d108ba@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ >> https://lore.kernel.org/all/Y8T5602bNhscGixb@unreal/ > > >>>> As a side effect of this, can we pull patch 2/7 from this series into the RC? >>> >>> No, everything is in for-rc/for-next now. >> >> Without that patch there will be a regression in 6.2. > > Sorry it's not clear. Want to move or include patch to keep -rc from being > broken. Your #2 above. I'm not concerned about #1 b/c it will fix itself in time > after merging with 6.2-rc. I didn't see this make it out yet. Can this still make it in for -rc? Based on Jason's reply [1] sounds like it will just work itself out in for-next. [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-rdma/Y8rSiD5s+ZFV666t@xxxxxxxxxx/ -Denny
