From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD088C05027 for ; Fri, 20 Jan 2023 17:10:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229738AbjATRKC (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Jan 2023 12:10:02 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:52122 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230456AbjATRJw (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Jan 2023 12:09:52 -0500 Received: from dfw.source.kernel.org (dfw.source.kernel.org [139.178.84.217]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A2FAB5E531 for ; Fri, 20 Jan 2023 09:09:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp.kernel.org (relay.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by dfw.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1423C62007 for ; Fri, 20 Jan 2023 17:09:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id F1751C4339B; Fri, 20 Jan 2023 17:09:46 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1674234587; bh=koFzSA+1tZjACNZl41NctzpC2FbTUIRtfCWCle8NoFI=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=MyvFSt8+ap9ioWqRe23qdrsscF8zad4ilrPTpt9ISzeciVEnFU2pbA/pz1dBd/44E VUE3VUJR2TAN3ihpj8IyJ/FKwH5C9cwy8s3RmSNR3yQSxXU6+EXOKCurj7vXkdZuNj v5382qWUE1gla/f9jt0eaMUIFU4gsnutr5F526czjwuC9c0T7mYtVXoBnzIb5o+J7v 7ZgT6AuzmpgEpZLEUE05ohcGyE8M1A7T7C9FQ7WmGIO5GuamR4x0hH0IjnHjCQMZEp tfNEjJPiltbWzUMPaFqp1w/Tx1q+j41dF6xi1O2casnBJB2nhspnc2nnJdRs2Pm73e 74EbXmJ4l9G6Q== Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2023 19:09:43 +0200 From: Leon Romanovsky To: Dennis Dalessandro Cc: Jason Gunthorpe , Dean Luick , linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH for-next 0/7] FIXME and other fixes Message-ID: References: <167328561962.1472990.9463955313515395755.stgit@awfm-02.cornelisnetworks.com> <3cf880fa-3374-541f-1996-d30d635db594@cornelisnetworks.com> <472565cb-e99d-95a6-4d20-6a34f77c8cf1@cornelisnetworks.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jan 18, 2023 at 08:04:52AM -0500, Dennis Dalessandro wrote: > On 1/16/23 2:16 AM, Leon Romanovsky wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 16, 2023 at 12:36:51AM -0500, Dennis Dalessandro wrote: > >> On 1/15/23 6:46 AM, Leon Romanovsky wrote: > >>> On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 12:21:50PM -0500, Dennis Dalessandro wrote: > >>>> On 1/10/23 4:03 PM, Dennis Dalessandro wrote: > >>>>> On 1/10/23 9:58 AM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > >>>>>> On Mon, Jan 09, 2023 at 02:03:58PM -0500, Dennis Dalessandro wrote: > >>>>>>> Dean fixes the FIXME that was left by Jason in the code to use the interval > >>>>>>> notifier. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> ? Which patch did that? > >>>>> > >>>>> My fault. The last patch in the previous series [1] was meant to go first here. > >>>>> I got off by 1 when I was splitting the patches out for submit. > >>>>> > >>>>> [1] > >>>>> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-rdma/167328549178.1472310.9867497376936699488.stgit@awfm-02.cornelisnetworks.com/T/#u > >>>> > >>>> As a side effect of this, can we pull patch 2/7 from this series into the RC? > >>> > >>> No, everything is in for-rc/for-next now. > >> > >> Without that patch there will be a regression in 6.2. > > > > I'm lost here. You are saying above that you wanted patch from -rc to be > > in -next series. However, you wrote about regression in 6.2, which is -rc. > > Originally I did not mean to send: > [PATCH for-rc 6/6] IB/hfi1: Remove user expected buffer invalidate race > for -rc. > > I didn't realize, it has a functional dependency on: > [PATCH for-next 2/7] IB/hfi1: Assign npages earlier > > Ideally either they both go to -rc or they both go to -next. > > >> Is there a reason it can't merge into -rc? > > > > Here you are asking to bring -next patches to -rc. > > One patch. > > > So please help me, what do you want to do with these branches? > > 1. -rc > > 2. -next > > > > Options are: > > 1. keep as is > > 2. revert > > Let me do some build testing. If we revert the -rc patch and then reapply to > -next we may encounter conflicts and/or build issues and just make things worse. > > > 3. anything else?Will get back to you if I come up with something else. > > > What we won't do: > > 1. backmerge -next to -rc > > So why is this not an option? Well ok so I don't mean we should merge. I guess > I'm more looking to cherry-pick. Backmerge will cause to the situation where features are brought to -rc. The cherry-pick will be: 1. Revert [PATCH for-next 2/7] IB/hfi1: Assign npages earlier] from -next 2. Apply [PATCH for-next 2/7] IB/hfi1: Assign npages earlier] to -rc Thanks