On Tue, Jun 29, 2021 at 11:14:02AM -0700, kan.liang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> From: Kan Liang <kan.liang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> The uncore unit with the type ID 0 and the unit ID 0 is missed.
>
> The table3 of the uncore unit maybe 0. The
> uncore_discovery_invalid_unit() mistakenly treated it as an invalid
> value.
>
> Remove the !unit.table3 check.
>
> Fixes: edae1f06c2cd ("perf/x86/intel/uncore: Parse uncore discovery tables")
> Reviewed-by: Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Kan Liang <kan.liang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> ---
> arch/x86/events/intel/uncore_discovery.h | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
Why is a bugfix that needs to be backported patch 5 in the series?
Shouldn't that be totally independant and sent on its own and not part
of this series at all so that it can be accepted and merged much
quicker? It also should not depened on the previous 4 patches, right?
Andi, you know better than this...
greg k-h
