On 8/9/23 04:05, Greg KH wrote:
On Mon, Aug 07, 2023 at 09:00:47AM -0500, Mario Limonciello wrote:From: Peichen Huang <peichen.huang@xxxxxxx> [Why] DPIA doesn't support UHBR, driver should not enable UHBR for dp tunneling [How] limit DPIA link rate to HBR3 Cc: Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@xxxxxxx> Cc: Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@xxxxxxx> Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Acked-by: Stylon Wang <stylon.wang@xxxxxxx> Signed-off-by: Peichen Huang <peichen.huang@xxxxxxx> Reviewed-by: Mustapha Ghaddar <Mustapha.Ghaddar@xxxxxxx> Tested-by: Daniel Wheeler <daniel.wheeler@xxxxxxx> Signed-off-by: Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@xxxxxxx> (cherry picked from commit 0e69ef6ea82e8eece7d2b2b45a0da9670eaaefff) This was CC to stable, but failed to apply because the file was renamed in 6.3-rc1 as part of 54618888d1ea ("drm/amd/display: break down dc_link.c")It also is not in 6.4.y, why not? I can't take it for 6.1.y only, otherwise people will have a regression when they move to a new kernel. thanks, greg k-h
This is one of those cases that the same commit landed in the tree twice as two hashes.
Here's the 6.4 hash (which is identical): $ git describe --contains 7c5835bcb9176df94683396f1c0e5df6bf5094b3 v6.4-rc7~9^2~2^2
