On Wed, Aug 08, 2018 at 08:58:01AM +0800, Jin, Yao wrote: > > > On 8/7/2018 9:09 PM, Greg KH wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 06, 2018 at 08:46:32AM +0800, Jin, Yao wrote: > > > > > > > > > On 7/19/2018 1:39 AM, Greg KH wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 10:09:44AM -0700, Andi Kleen wrote: > > > > > On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 11:29:50AM +0200, Greg KH wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 08:41:28AM +0800, Jin, Yao wrote: > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The stable kernel 4.9.112 has supported Intel uncore feature in perf core. > > > > > > > While it also needs the perf tool supporting to let perf uncore feature > > > > > > > work. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Following backport patches enables basic perf uncore feature in 4.9.112. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > For example, on skylake desktop, > > > > > > > > > > > > Why would anyone care about this on a "desktop" for 4.9? No one should > > > > > > be using 4.9.y on a desktop anymore, it's over 2 years old, why would > > > > > > they expect any "new" hardware support to work for them? Why can't they > > > > > > > > > > It's actually not new hardware support: Skylake is fairly old hardware > > > > > at this point. > > > > > > > > So is 4.9. I don't understand your point. The hardware is obviously > > > > newer than 4.9 was, otherwise the support for it would already be in > > > > there, right? > > > > > > > > > > just use 4.14.y or better yet. 4.17.y? Desktops should NOT be using a 2 > > > > > > year old kernel. > > > > > > > > > > > > Heck, servers shouldn't either, but that's a totally different rant. > > > > > > > > > > These chips are not only used in desktops but also in servers. > > > > > > > > This was asked for with regards to desktops, so now I'm confused. > > > > Exactly who/what is going to be needing/wanting/using these changes? > > > > > > > > > > However, for hardware that is newer than the base kernel version > > > > > > release, I have no sympathy. Just use a newer kernel, right? > > > > > > > > > > We have customers which are on old kernels with new hardware. > > > > > > > > That's obviously not a wise thing to do for lots of good reasons. This > > > > exact example being a huge one (i.e. you can't go back in time and add > > > > support for hardware that was not out yet.) > > > > > > > > > The backports happen either way. This is just an attempt to do it in a > > > > > coordinated fashion. > > > > > > > > There was no coordination here, just a list of git commit ids. Which is > > > > great, and all that is really needed, but I'm confused as to who is > > > > trying to coordinate with who? > > > > > > > > > > What distro relies on a 4.9 kernel for brand new hardware that does not > > > > > > already support a newer kernel release for such hardware? > > > > > > > > > > None afaik, but there is a lot of Linux use beyond distros. > > > > > > > > So no distro uses this, which makes me really wonder who would be the > > > > user of these backports. And for how long? Why are these people not > > > > moving to 4.14 already given that the published date for 4.9 end-of-life > > > > is getting very close. Are you expecting to be rescued by Google again? > > > > > > > > > > Hi Greg, > > > > > > We do see 4.9 is now used by Alibaba. > > > > > > Ali kernel is opensourced at https://github.com/alibaba/alikernel > > > > Ok, does this user require these patches? Do they have them in their > > kernel already? Do they need me to add them before they can use the > > hardware they already have? I don't understand the connection here... > > > > Hi Greg, > > Ali needs the uncore patches and they have backported to their tree. So for > adding uncore patches to stable tree, just neutral for them. > > I wish to show that 4.9 is being used by some customers. > > > And why did no one answer all of my questions from my first email? > > > > Sorry about that. I just answer part of questions, for example, "The > patchset supports the server like Skylake, and it also supports some old > servers, for example, Broadwell and Haswell, .....". I want to represent > that it's not only for new hardware like SKL but also for some old hardware > which may run with 4.9. > > But for other questions, such as, who uses 4.9 in desktop, what distros need > 4.9. I'm sorry I don't really know the answers so I don't reply. Sorry about > that. I asked for the diffstat :(
