From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: arnd@arndb.de (Arnd Bergmann) Date: Thu, 28 May 2015 10:49:46 +0200 Subject: [PATCH 2/3] Revert "bus: mvebu-mbus: make sure SDRAM CS for DMA don't overlap the MBus bridge window" In-Reply-To: <1432802414-12355-3-git-send-email-thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com> References: <1432802414-12355-1-git-send-email-thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com> <1432802414-12355-3-git-send-email-thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com> Message-ID: <2099675.EoA8CYtzXr@wuerfel> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Thursday 28 May 2015 10:40:13 Thomas Petazzoni wrote: > Fixes: 1737cac69369 ("bus: mvebu-mbus: make sure SDRAM CS for DMA don't overlap the MBus bridge window") > Cc: # v4.0+ > --- > drivers/bus/mvebu-mbus.c | 105 ++++++++--------------------------------------- > 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 89 deletions(-) Hmm, the stable kernel rules say that a patch cannot exceed 100 lines with context, so this one is technically too large. Maybe Greg has a suggestion about what to do here. Is it possible to make an exception for a revert? In theory you could make a smaller version of the patch that adds an #if 0 instead of removing some of the code that was added, in order to get below the limit, but that seems counterproductive for minimizing the possible risk. Arnd