From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Len Brown Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/98] acpi: fix of pmtimer overflow that make Cx states time incorrect Date: Fri, 03 Apr 2009 12:22:28 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: References: <1238214733-8285-1-git-send-email-lenb@kernel.org> <200904021426.41828.trenn@suse.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Return-path: Received: from vms173003pub.verizon.net ([206.46.173.3]:44457 "EHLO vms173003pub.verizon.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S936771AbZDCQWr (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Apr 2009 12:22:47 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([96.237.168.40]) by vms173003.mailsrvcs.net (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 6.3-7.04 (built Sep 26 2008; 32bit)) with ESMTPA id <0KHJ00BHN9HHE8T0@vms173003.mailsrvcs.net> for linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org; Fri, 03 Apr 2009 11:22:30 -0500 (CDT) In-reply-to: <200904021426.41828.trenn@suse.de> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: Thomas Renninger Cc: stable@kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, "alex.shi" , "Yakui.zhao" , Andrew Morton > Is this worth adding: > CC: stable@kernel.org > but wait until 2.6.30 is finished and no regressions have been reported? > Then backport things to .29/.28 and eventually others? possibly -- lets re-visit, say at rc3. What happens when this is not applied is that the accounting gets screwed up, powertop looks wrong, and in rare cases -- non-optimal c-state selection decisions could be made. So the actual symptom is mostly cosmetic -- but the possibility of puzzled or even alarmed users may be justification to backport. But as this will not happen on most machines, and the failure is not severe, I don't hink a crusade to backport to every possible old release would make sense. thanks, -Len Brown, Intel Open Source Technology Center