From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Paul E. McKenney" Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86/tbl/trace: Do not trace on CPU that is offline Date: Sat, 7 Feb 2015 12:09:48 -0800 Message-ID: <20150207200948.GA5418@linux.vnet.ibm.com> References: <20150206200653.009919583@goodmis.org> <20150206200800.689573476@goodmis.org> <20150206232754.GA17751@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20150206230206.0733828d@grimm.local.home> <20150207102002.4edc054c@grimm.local.home> Reply-To: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from e35.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.153]:37802 "EHLO e35.co.us.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756142AbbBGUJz (ORCPT ); Sat, 7 Feb 2015 15:09:55 -0500 Received: from /spool/local by e35.co.us.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Sat, 7 Feb 2015 13:09:54 -0700 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150207102002.4edc054c@grimm.local.home> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Steven Rostedt Cc: Sedat Dilek , LKML , Dave Hansen , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , linux-next , Stephen Rothwell , Kristen Carlson Accardi , "H. Peter Anvin" , Rik van Riel , Mel Gorman , Andrew Morton On Sat, Feb 07, 2015 at 10:20:02AM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Sat, 7 Feb 2015 09:01:34 +0100 > Sedat Dilek wrote: > > > > - Tested-by's > > - Reference of 2/2 to 1/2 > > The two are together in the series and fix two different bugs. They do > not need to reference each other. > > > - CC: stable v3.17+/v3.18+ ? (1/2 has a hint for backporting in case > > of 3.17+ which is BTW EOL, not sure if there are main distros > > supporting linux-3.17.y) > > The first patch fixes a bug introduced in 3.18. There would be no splat > in 3.17 because the check didn't exist then. But the RCU reference > while cpu offline (second bug) was introduced in 3.17 and that is what > the second patch fixes. > > > > > BTW, do you happen to know if there is a someting like a > > "Requires-tag" or "Precondition-tag" (for example the Fixes-tag is > > very helpful)? > > We don't need more tags. > > > AFAICS people place such information into the commit-message. > > I have seen "References:" but this is more to point to a > > bug-tracking-system (BTS). > > > > EXAMPLE: > > > > commit 63b03e2d2477586440741677ecac45bcf28d7b1 > > "mutex: Always clear owner field upon mutex_unlock()" > > > > References: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=87955 > > > > I may add that, but more appropriate would be to add the commit that > fixes the bug to the bug report. > > > Maybe ask godfather of SubmittingPatches greg-kh? > > Heh, I haven't read that document in years. Given my confusion about stable tags, I read stable_kernel_rules.txt the other day, and found this: - If the patch requires other patches as prerequisites which can be cherry-picked, then this can be specified in the following format in the sign-off area: Cc: # 3.3.x: a1f84a3: sched: Check for idle Cc: # 3.3.x: 1b9508f: sched: Rate-limit newidle Cc: # 3.3.x: fd21073: sched: Fix affinity logic Cc: # 3.3.x Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar The tag sequence has the meaning of: git cherry-pick a1f84a3 git cherry-pick 1b9508f git cherry-pick fd21073 git cherry-pick Does that do what you need? Thanx, Paul