From: Matt Fleming <matt@codeblueprint.co.uk>
To: Alex Thorlton <athorlton@sgi.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Russ Anderson <rja@sgi.com>,
Mike Travis <travis@sgi.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
x86@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Skip UV runtime services mapping in the efi_runtime_disabled case
Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2016 10:23:07 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160804092307.GI3636@codeblueprint.co.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160803193607.GN5939@stormcage.americas.sgi.com>
On Wed, 03 Aug, at 02:36:07PM, Alex Thorlton wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 01, 2016 at 09:28:06AM -0500, Alex Thorlton wrote:
> > So, it definitely needs to go in for v4.8, but it's kind of a toss-up
> > for the older kernels. I'll discuss this with the other guys around
> > here to see what they think, and get back to you a bit later, if that's
> > alright?
>
> We talked about this, and I think everyone here agrees that there's not
> much point in pulling this change back to the older kernels. The only
> exception here would be that we'd definitely like this change on the
> older kernels *if* my other memmap fixes get ported back to those
> kernels, though I don't know what the chances are of those changes
> making it through stable.
>
> So, unless you have a particular reason that you'd like to pull it back
> to the old kernels, or you think that my other fixes might make it back
> there, I don't see much point.
>
> Let me know what you think!
Sound reasoning. I'll apply this to v4.8 only.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-08-04 9:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-07-26 22:38 [RFC PATCH] Fix EFI callbacks on UV during kexec Alex Thorlton
2016-07-26 22:38 ` [PATCH] Skip UV runtime services mapping in the efi_runtime_disabled case Alex Thorlton
2016-08-01 13:49 ` Matt Fleming
2016-08-01 14:28 ` Alex Thorlton
2016-08-03 19:36 ` Alex Thorlton
2016-08-04 9:23 ` Matt Fleming [this message]
2016-08-01 13:39 ` [RFC PATCH] Fix EFI callbacks on UV during kexec Matt Fleming
2016-08-01 14:34 ` Alex Thorlton
2016-08-04 9:25 ` Matt Fleming
2016-08-04 15:07 ` Alex Thorlton
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20160804092307.GI3636@codeblueprint.co.uk \
--to=matt@codeblueprint.co.uk \
--cc=athorlton@sgi.com \
--cc=bp@suse.de \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=rja@sgi.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=travis@sgi.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome