On Fri, Nov 01, 2013 at 02:58:16AM +0000, Zheng, Lv wrote: > > From: Rafael J. Wysocki [mailto:rjw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] > > Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2013 8:22 PM > > > > On Thursday, October 31, 2013 05:08:50 AM Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > > On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 12:39:21PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > > On Thursday, October 31, 2013 09:07:40 AM Lv Zheng wrote: > > > > > There are bug-fixes for AML interpreter upstreamed, fixing some serious > > > > > issues found in recent platforms. These fixes make Linux AML interpreter > > > > > more ACPI 2.0 ASL concept compliant. Further AML interpreter fixes should > > > > > be based on such improvements, thus they are good materials for stable. > > > > > > > > > > This patch set can be safely applied to linux-3.8: > > > > > commit 19f949f52599ba7c3f67a5897ac6be14bfcb1200 upstream. > > > > > > > > > > The patch set has passed build/boot tests on the following machines: > > > > > Dell Inspiron Mini 1010 (i386) > > > > > HP Compaq 8200 Elite SFF PC (x86-64) > > > > > > > > > > Bob Moore (4): > > > > > ACPICA: Interpreter: Fix Store() when implicit conversion is not > > > > > possible. > > > > > ACPICA: DeRefOf operator: Update to fully resolve FieldUnit and > > > > > BufferField refs. > > > > > ACPICA: Return error if DerefOf resolves to a null package element. > > > > > ACPICA: Fix for a Store->ArgX when ArgX contains a reference to a > > > > > field. > > > > > > > > Hi Greg, > > > > > > > > Please take patches [1-4/4] for stable. > > > > > > "Which" stable tree? > > > > > > I don't do 3.8, it's long been end-of-life, although one company is > > > trying to keep it alive, but that's not me. > > > > > > I'm only handling 3.4, 3.10, and 3.11 stable trees right now, which > > > one(s) should these be applied to? > > > > 3.10.x and 3.11.x then. > > > > Lv, do the original mainline commits apply to these kernels? > > > > Rafael > > Hi, Rafael and Greg > > I checked the back port dependencies since v3.8: > 1. [PATCH 1] belongs to v3.9. > 2. [PATCH 4] includes an empty line belonging to a coding style fix affecting this series (between [PATCH 3] and [PATCH 4]). > Thus, > 1. For v3.10: > [PATCH 1]: It's already in the repo, so please drop it. > [PATCH 2-4]: They can be used directly as 3.10.x stable materials. > 2. For v3.11: > [PATCH 1]: It's already in the repo, so please drop it. > [PATCH 2-3]: They can be used directly as 3.11.x stable materials. > [PATCH 4]: The original commit from Linus' tree should be used instead. > > I checked the commit log since v3.4. > There is no functional change done to the AML executer between v3.4 and v3.8. > The problem is there is a coding style fix affecting this series (between v3.4 and [PATCH 1]). > I generated the following diff block before applying [PATCH 1], and obtained a successful build/boot to a v3.4 kernel with these patches applied. > Thus, > 1. For v3.4: > [PATCH 1]: You can merge this diff block to [PATCH 1] or simply modify the [PATCH 1] by manually adding this white space. > [PATCH 2-4]: They can be used directly as 3.4.x stable materials. Ok, I think I have this all properly queued up for 3.4, 3.10, and 3.11-stable trees, can you please check and verify I didn't mess anything up? 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