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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.