From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759449Ab2IFAht (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Sep 2012 20:37:49 -0400 Received: from mga02.intel.com ([134.134.136.20]:29187 "EHLO mga02.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754723Ab2IFAhs (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Sep 2012 20:37:48 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.80,377,1344236400"; d="scan'208";a="197595257" Message-ID: <5047F045.5060103@linux.intel.com> Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2012 17:37:25 -0700 From: Darren Hart User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:15.0) Gecko/20120828 Thunderbird/15.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Greg Kroah-Hartman CC: Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linux Stable , Tomoya MORINAGA , Feng Tang , Alexander Stein Subject: Re: [PATCH] pch_uart: Add eg20t_port lock field, avoid recursive spinlocks References: <422aa2054659680fb138d2153dcc852b2620b04d.1346889148.git.dvhart@linux.intel.com> <20120906001448.GA7278@kroah.com> <20120906001841.GA7433@kroah.com> <5047ED8C.1060005@linux.intel.com> In-Reply-To: <5047ED8C.1060005@linux.intel.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4.4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 09/05/2012 05:25 PM, Darren Hart wrote: > > > On 09/05/2012 05:18 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: >> On Wed, Sep 05, 2012 at 05:14:48PM -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: >>> On Wed, Sep 05, 2012 at 05:04:07PM -0700, Darren Hart wrote: >>>> The following patch has been included in linux-next >>>> (fe89def79c48e2149abdd1e816523e69a9067191) but has not yet landed in mainline >>>> nor been queued for stable so far as I can determine. This patch addresses a >>>> deadlock in mainline and is a prerequisite for an additional fix required by the >>>> PREEMPT_RT kernel. Can we get this pulled into 3.4.11 please? >>> >>> 3.4.11? It has to hit Linus's tree first. >>> >>>> Perhaps I am >>>> jumping the gun, but this patch was originally pulled on June 19, 2012. >>> >>> Remember, we missed a pull cycle for tty due to other problems, I >>> thought I picked all of the different pieces needed for 3.6, but I must >>> of missed this one. >> >> Nope, it made it, it is commit 2588aba002d14e938c2f56d299ecf3e7ce1302a5. > > Doh, I pulled master and stable, but only checked stable. Sigh. My > apologies Greg. > >> >> Now, do you want that patch in the -stable releases? If so, how far >> back? :) > > Yes, back to 3.0 would be ideal. It needs mangling for 3.2 and back > though. I will send patches for 3.4, 3.2 and possibly 3.0 following the > stable_kernel_rules.txt procedure. On second thought, there are way too many changes to pch_uart that are required before this patch can really be applied prior to 3.4. I suspect these are not all appropriate for -stable. I'd be happy just getting this into 3.4.11. 2588aba002d14e938c2f56d299ecf3e7ce1302a5 cherry-picks cleanly to 3.4. Thanks, -- Darren Hart Intel Open Source Technology Center Yocto Project - Technical Lead - Linux Kernel