From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.alien8.de (mail.alien8.de [65.109.113.108]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D6231204686; Tue, 10 Dec 2024 18:05:09 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=65.109.113.108 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1733853912; cv=none; b=dynFiwLfN2fqMsXQTG5/auxr6q9OWeyGesEyBmLU838pN3DikO6SFWmGjMg7T2Zs4+UjkdYSIqvqpydWsTt3addsGOcujFD5SbeTzSX2XIfCHZanb/g6ic2v3XYS6bVBcWC4CXVqYbT4Y4zR6R2M5HIQjoJ/Dhu+mBunKORufgE= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1733853912; c=relaxed/simple; bh=z2LGdyrOdwT77YDmJ+kUH2F8LUR3Khe+4CixxN7FVqY=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=SRidU1Pp90DvlnSLNYX3XzOif3HitDPCn4qu+kv98sif/4qmxqgRZ9HXbZ7+b/aJGOibjMo/ToJ/nZTtm/FzSigeaaF7KGGc7LlanO/7MTdyvvN43B0EWAO54A3aSCwAs+2O7wWfp9Ba8z5L7Mz2UaGCwwpAcIUqflu59EU2PdY= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=alien8.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=alien8.de; dkim=fail (4096-bit key) header.d=alien8.de header.i=@alien8.de header.b=Xnw88h3D reason="signature verification failed"; arc=none smtp.client-ip=65.109.113.108 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=alien8.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=alien8.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (4096-bit key) header.d=alien8.de header.i=@alien8.de header.b="Xnw88h3D" Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail.alien8.de (SuperMail on ZX Spectrum 128k) with ESMTP id 77D6740E028B; Tue, 10 Dec 2024 18:05:07 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at mail.alien8.de Authentication-Results: mail.alien8.de (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (4096-bit key) reason="fail (body has been altered)" header.d=alien8.de Received: from mail.alien8.de ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.alien8.de [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id UJAuxgaioa81; Tue, 10 Dec 2024 18:05:04 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=alien8.de; s=alien8; t=1733853903; bh=CXcv5arJMIUFP9rMdXwu2cvruK5rZq+dOIKJAl96sJo=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=Xnw88h3DGTdQnHAiAmP1g+BGgcvQ6FAdbx1BJDq1IGGjpQQ9M80t3CluOSrEvSmVb Mfi/ARdRBq1BF9STTq/YOLqoZUjbePVk+jod/GgpKgjAQMuyQyJsYYfsl6q1Fb1UH5 OR9z8Q5TDecOWTZasXYbAEb2XsVssCP/67Q2+fdsnyt68cKE/rpShtexCB/ccblFKb LUuWyCM4NXxAhKEYDBifSYdos+iCgO9ljWZHTwKubD4YfV/cBa5efXwee4SoB1ZSQV ZCN2s5FFQyhzjVExerPgdybYvUGt5k/pXuDqwrQgZsEA7mrEmAOo/qb/lvpwGCn6WQ zFnL715XT5vbJL6427rqVK//eopzzycwjlPXsut6P2n2nQRNYaUXWDFAgUsEfTwStH i2+bjYbF5ILkiRDGPtV+Kqz6lyfibTs76vIE1yIW/bRiqmCfl77fpbUfZdsFo/qPDl LpQbC08J5LaNjFdLrtllyWYldMXeBGdb5vMRIU2an5UQR0zLcfA8Sb35pN6VMv9Kf1 GipFygrqzvOMsuQH+jKQGJ1rYwS73cjpRDK8N2E6vluy+9F8oJCkIIk0jd+kHUCXBh tMaW3tu3A7dKoR2RrzVdXO/EPii5cJs/jlFT7+2I+O3T3BTwRYlQgNWRXCG76MOtAN nFcJUI1lMqHRtnxgbAhFteGM= Received: from zn.tnic (p200300ea971f930c329c23fffea6a903.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [IPv6:2003:ea:971f:930c:329c:23ff:fea6:a903]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature ECDSA (P-256) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mail.alien8.de (SuperMail on ZX Spectrum 128k) with ESMTPSA id 56A8240E0266; Tue, 10 Dec 2024 18:04:58 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2024 19:04:52 +0100 From: Borislav Petkov To: "Naik, Avadhut" Cc: linux-edac@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, yazen.ghannam@amd.com, Avadhut Naik Subject: Re: [PATCH] EDAC/amd64: Fix possible module load failure on some UMC usage combinations Message-ID: <20241210180452.GLZ1iCxOTAL6eJaaH_@fat_crate.local> References: <20241209215636.2744733-1-avadhut.naik@amd.com> <20241210095517.GAZ1gQBcS2BKA30-GO@fat_crate.local> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Dec 10, 2024 at 11:32:06AM -0600, Naik, Avadhut wrote: > But not so sure about the CC:stable. > Quoting from stable-kernel-rules about the patches that are accepted in= to stable. >=20 > It must fix a real bug that bothers people (not a, =E2=80=9CThis could = be a problem...=E2=80=9D type thing). >=20 > This has not been reported by anyone yet. IMO, it classifies as > "This could be a problem" type issue. > Would you agree? So if someone populates the last 4 UMCs, he won't have EDAC load on long-= term kernels. So are you sure about "this could be a problem"? Or is it more like a "this is real problem for some configurations" issue= ? IOW, at least "oh, that's not good" issue. Or? --=20 Regards/Gruss, Boris. https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette