From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752283AbaHLFcs (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Aug 2014 01:32:48 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:61319 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751895AbaHLFcq (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Aug 2014 01:32:46 -0400 Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2014 11:01:58 +0530 From: Amit Shah To: Greg KH Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org, Amos Kong , Virtualization List , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Rusty Russell Subject: Re: [3.16 stable PATCH 1/1] virtio-rng: fix multi-device startup Message-ID: <20140812053158.GJ4184@grmbl.mre> References: <5ef3aa4ea1932b7655d9db5a0139b8a2922af0db.1407760907.git.amit.shah@redhat.com> <20140811225527.GB10721@kroah.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20140811225527.GB10721@kroah.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On (Tue) 12 Aug 2014 [06:55:27], Greg KH wrote: > On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 06:11:47PM +0530, Amit Shah wrote: > > This is a 3.16-only patch. The linux.git fix is > > 5c06273401f2eb7b290cadbae18ee00f8f65e893, which fixes this issue in a > > different way. > > Why "different"? Why can't I take that original patch instead? What is > different in this patch, and why? The commit referenced moves the hwrng_register() call to the ->scan() callback instead of it being in probe(). This was done to ensure the virtio-rng devices can contribute to the initial system entropy introduced in commit d9e7972619334. That patch is quite small too, but will need a slight conflict resolution due to the previous two code-shuffling patches, and also the following revert. However, I decided against the backport of the ->scan() method, since it wasn't designed to solve this regression, it happens to solve it, and it actually introduces new functionality. I would be happy to provide a backport of the relevant patches, if you think that would be alright. Thanks, Amit