* John Stultz <john.stultz@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Just wanted to send out a few timekeeping fixes that were merged
> in 3.14 which are appropriate for -stable.
No, they are not appropriate at all.
> This queue backports the following fixes:
> -----------------------------------------
> f55c07607a38f84b5c7e6066ee1cfe433fa5643c timekeeping: Fix lost updates to tai adjustment
> 5258d3f25c76f6ab86e9333abf97a55a877d3870 timekeeping: Fix potential lost pv notification of time change
> 6fdda9a9c5db367130cf32df5d6618d08b89f46a timekeeping: Avoid possible deadlock from clock_was_set_delayed
> 04005f6011e3b504cd4d791d9769f7cb9a3b2eae timekeeping: Fix CLOCK_TAI timer/nanosleep delays
> 330a1617b0a6268d427aa5922c94d082b1d3e96d timekeeping: Fix missing timekeeping_update in suspend path
> d5a1c7e3fc38d9c7d629e1e47f32f863acbdec3d rtc-cmos: Add an alarm disable quirk
These patches should have had Cc: stable in them and should have gone
through timers/urgent!
Merging fixes in the merge window this way is absolutely unacceptable.
If a fix is good enough for -stable then it's doubly good for
timers/urgent.
You sent me those changes as:
[GIT PULL] Timekeeping changes for 3.14
Nothing said that those were urgent fixes - if they had I'd have
insisted on merging them earlier.
You in fact said:
> This includes a number of changes I had earlier proposed for 3.13,
> but decided to defer due to it being so late in the 3.13 cycle.
Deferring them for v3.13 means they are not eligible for -stable!
So this is a big process FAIL, don't do that.
Thanks,
Ingo
--
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