Re: [GIT PULL] x86 fixes

Bagas Sanjaya
2025-12-15T03:01:00Z

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1330 bytes --]

On Sun, Dec 14, 2025 at 09:31:31AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de> wrote:
>
> > On Sun, Dec 14, 2025 at 08:51:53AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > > It's Linus's preference: a couple of years ago, when I did something
> > > similar to what you did here Linus requested that fixes with -stable
> > > tags not live in -next indefinitely, but be sent to his tree.
> > > -next should not be a dumping ground for long-term testing.
> >
> > Well, this is a question for the maintainers summit but that just ended...
> >
> > The stable tag is the sure-fire way which the stable team uses to know
> > that a patch needs to be picked up. If you remove the stable tag, I now
> > have to pay attention when it goes upstream that I need to send it to
> > them unless the AI picks it up.
>
> Yeah, I agree about that and I've added it back, but note
> Linus's clearly stated past preference for -stable marked fixes
> to not linger too long in -next - which in my book trumps any
> preferences you may or may not have, regardless of how many
> times you've 'explained' it 'upthread'. ;-)

Hi,

Just FYI that this PR didn't get merged for 6.19-rc1. Any plan to resend
it for rc2 (considering Boris's objection)?

Thanks.

--
An old man doll... just what I always wanted! - Clara

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 228 bytes --]