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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E3B5C43464 for ; Sat, 19 Sep 2020 18:12:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [203.11.71.2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9C7F62075E for ; Sat, 19 Sep 2020 18:12:14 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="cpvwH2Kr" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 9C7F62075E Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Received: from bilbo.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [IPv6:2401:3900:2:1::3]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BtzLh28gKzDqx5 for ; Sun, 20 Sep 2020 04:12:12 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=kernel.org (client-ip=198.145.29.99; helo=mail.kernel.org; envelope-from=sashal@kernel.org; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; unprotected) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=default header.b=cpvwH2Kr; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4BtzJn2y2kzDqRr for ; Sun, 20 Sep 2020 04:10:33 +1000 (AEST) Received: from localhost (c-73-47-72-35.hsd1.nh.comcast.net [73.47.72.35]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7DC222075E; Sat, 19 Sep 2020 18:10:30 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1600539030; bh=ng7qoQuro8I40AS+rk/GWBwGyH15HMQ2lDGOq46y4z4=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=cpvwH2KrCL/Wnp9RLnIilCAmFNGJnA/Xz3AeEVRdVfqGVPzVfVP0VofE667VVToHs jwuf3LzAoLV6m+kZlGbQJM0pqhCaQGX9sb9Q+5Pml3db5kddP3elGivYKzJVOST361 sxBp9dKbdTYoXsXbuK/Lzs7A2Rtdn2z8KHlU/og8= Date: Sat, 19 Sep 2020 14:10:29 -0400 From: Sasha Levin To: Frederic Barrat Subject: Re: [PATCH AUTOSEL 5.4 101/330] powerpc/powernv/ioda: Fix ref count for devices with their own PE Message-ID: <20200919181029.GI2431@sasha-vm> References: <20200918020110.2063155-1-sashal@kernel.org> <20200918020110.2063155-101-sashal@kernel.org> <52532d8a-8e90-8a68-07bd-5a3e08c58475@linux.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <52532d8a-8e90-8a68-07bd-5a3e08c58475@linux.ibm.com> X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Donnellan Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" On Fri, Sep 18, 2020 at 08:35:06AM +0200, Frederic Barrat wrote: > > >Le 18/09/2020 à 03:57, Sasha Levin a écrit : >>From: Frederic Barrat >> >>[ Upstream commit 05dd7da76986937fb288b4213b1fa10dbe0d1b33 ] >> > >This patch is not desirable for stable, for 5.4 and 4.19 (it was >already flagged by autosel back in April. Not sure why it's showing >again now) Hey Fred, This was a bit of a "lie", it wasn't a run of AUTOSEL, but rather an audit of patches that went into distro/vendor trees but not into the upstream stable trees. I can see that this patch was pulled into Ubuntu's 5.4 tree, is it not needed in the upstream stable tree? -- Thanks, Sasha