On Thu, Dec 12, 2024 at 02:58:42PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Thu, Dec 12 2024 at 14:03, gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > The patch below does not apply to the 6.12-stable tree. > > If someone wants it applied there, or to any other stable or longterm > > tree, then please email the backport, including the original git commit > > id to <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>. > > > > To reproduce the conflict and resubmit, you may use the following commands: > > > > git fetch https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git/ linux-6.12.y > > git checkout FETCH_HEAD > > git cherry-pick -x 76031d9536a076bf023bedbdb1b4317fc801dd67 > > # <resolve conflicts, build, test, etc.> > > git commit -s > > git send-email --to '<stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>' --in-reply-to '2024121203-griminess-blah-4e97@gregkh' --subject-prefix 'PATCH 6.12.y' HEAD^.. > > > > Possible dependencies: > > > > There clearly is a dependency: > > > From 76031d9536a076bf023bedbdb1b4317fc801dd67 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > > From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2024 11:16:30 +0100 > > Subject: [PATCH] clocksource: Make negative motion detection more robust > > <snip> > > > Fixes: c163e40af9b2 ("timekeeping: Always check for negative motion") > > This was merged in the 6.13 merge window into Linus tree and not > backported to 6.12.y according to my clone of the stable tree. > > AI went sideways? Nope, that commit is now in all of the stable queues, which is why I added this backport. Or attempted to. > But I don't think these two commits are necessarily stable material, > though I don't have a strong opinion on it. If c163e40af9b2 is > backported, then it has it's own large dependency chain on pre 6.10 > kernels... It's in the queues for some reason, let me figure out why...
