From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751340AbbFXHkt (ORCPT ); Wed, 24 Jun 2015 03:40:49 -0400 Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:42147 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750787AbbFXHkm (ORCPT ); Wed, 24 Jun 2015 03:40:42 -0400 Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2015 09:40:29 +0200 From: Borislav Petkov To: Linus Torvalds Cc: linux-edac , x86-ml , lkml Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] EDAC updates for 4.2 Message-ID: <20150624074029.GA32642@pd.tnic> References: <20150622091140.GA20244@pd.tnic> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 03:49:50PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 2:11 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote: > > > > Important: Please merge this stuff *after* you have merged the tip pile > > because it depends on it. > > What does this mean? It means that it depends on functionality which went in through tip. And to be more specific, the dependencies are the DEFERRED_ERROR_VECTOR define and the amd_get_nodes_per_socket() helper. And it all is confined to the AMD error injection module drivers/edac/mce_amd_inj.c. So this is a debugging module for error injection - not something anyone would ever use in production. Everything else works fine. > If it doesn't work or compile without the tip pile, then I'm not > pulling it at all, since that means that any problems are not > bisectable. Ok, how would you prefer this solved - should I merge the relevant tip branches into it? Or should I remove the drivers/edac/mce_amd_inj.c changes from the pull request? In general, how would you prefer EDAC stuff handled properly when it depends on x86 functionality which goes through tip? > The patches are based on 4.1-rc1. If it doesn't work on top of that, > then that means that you clearly have tested *none* of this. Which > just makes me go "yeah, I'm not pulling untested crap". Of course it has been tested but with the relevant tip branches merged. Thanks. -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. ECO tip #101: Trim your mails when you reply. --