On Fri, Sep 09, 2016 at 12:48:34PM -0300, Fabio Estevam wrote: > Hi Marc, > > On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 12:42 PM, Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > >> Without this patch imx6ul SoC hangs after a 'reboot' command. > > > > But that's not a regression, right? It *never* worked before, as far as > > I know, because we never supported such a configuration in the past. > > imx6ul is supported since kernel 4.3. > > > I'm a bit concerned when I see backporting random patches to random > > kernel versions for things that are not bugs. I'll leave it up to Greg > > to decide, but I thought I should point out what this patch actually is. > > Not bugs? I consider the hang I get after running 'reboot' on imx6ul a bug. > > According to Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt : > > " - It must fix a problem that causes a build error (but not for things > marked CONFIG_BROKEN), an oops, a hang, data corruption, a real > security issue, or some "oh, that's not good" issue. In short, something > critical. " > > , so that's why I submitted for stable inclusion. But if it never worked to start with, that's not really a regression, that is a "make new hardware work" type thing. Did it work properly in 4.3? What caused support for this hardware to break? thanks, greg k-h -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html