Re: Don't apply 9f022e54b8ea82d1ecdf3bd78d9ab9f44d6b0655 to stable please.

[Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>]

On Mon, Apr 02, 2012 at 04:43:05PM -0700, Suresh Siddha wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-04-02 at 16:27 -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 02, 2012 at 06:47:02PM -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> > > Hey Greg,
> > > 
> > > The git commit 9f022e54b8ea82d1ecdf3bd78d9ab9f44d6b0655 has CC stable@kernel.org
> > > but it breaks Xen - we are working to fix it in 3.4, but the fix for it
> > > does some architectual changes (136d249ef7dbf0fefa292082cc40be1ea864cbd6) that
> > > I don't know if you are comfortable putting in stable tree.
> > > 
> > 
> > I have no idea what that git commit id referrs to, as it's not in
> > Linus's tree at the moment.
> > 
> > Care to give me a subject?  diffstat?  Some kind of hint?
> 
> Greg, Konrad is referring to:
> 
> commit 73d63d038ee9f769f5e5b46792d227fe20e442c5

Ok, then where did the 9f022e54b8ea82d1ecdf3bd78d9ab9f44d6b0655 number
come from?  And where was I supposed to be able to determine what it is
pointing to?

Come on people...

> Author: Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@intel.com>
> Date:   Mon Mar 12 11:36:33 2012 -0700
> 
>     x86/ioapic: Add register level checks to detect bogus io-apic entries
> 
> With out this commit, if the bios lists bogus io-apic's, then we will
> see some error messages ("Unable to reset IRR for apic")during linux
> boot which are benign. But as this patch breaks Xen, I am ok if these
> don't get applied to 'stable'. Also I think it is Ingo who added the
> 'stable' tag. Ingo, are you ok with this?

What stable trees did this already go into in the releases today?

You need to tell me what I need to revert here, SPECIFICALLY, and in
what tree, if needed, otherwise I have no idea what is going on, sorry,
I can't read minds.

> For the mainline, we have queued more patches to fix the Xen breakage.

And what is that supposed to mean to me?

Again, help me out here, this is making no sense at all.

How am I supposed to "not apply" a patch that I have never heard of?
And how am I supposed to "not apply" a patch that I have already
applied?

How about you all start over from the beginning and tell me EXACTLY what
you want me to do here, because I sure as heck don't know what is going
on...

confused,

greg k-h