From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] EFI fix Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2019 09:53:18 +0100 Message-ID: <20190112085318.GA119110@gmail.com> References: <20190111074614.GA68053@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Ard Biesheuvel , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-efi , Thomas Gleixner , Borislav Petkov , Peter Zijlstra , Andrew Morton List-Id: linux-efi@vger.kernel.org * Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 6:22 AM Ard Biesheuvel > wrote: > > > > I was hoping we could merge this patch (so we can backport it), but > > resolve the conflict by dropping the kmemleak_ignore() again [..] > > Well, we'd drop the new #include line also, since it would be > pointless without the kmemleak_ignore(). > > End result: there would be nothing left. Better not to merge it at all. Indeed! > It's easy enough to backport, and just say "done differently upstream > in commit 80424b02d42b ("efi: Reduce the amount of memblock > reservations for persistent allocations"). > > The stable tree doesn't require that the *same* commits be upstream, > it only requires that the fixes be upstream and Greg&al want a pointer > to the upstream fix just so that they know they're not fixing > something that might still be broken upstream. > > See for example (just random googling) > > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git/commit/?id=37435f7e80ef9adc32a69013c18f135e3f434244 > > which shows that "fixed differently upstream" case and points to why. Thanks - I'm dropping the commit from efi/urgent. Ingo