From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 240A4219EB for ; Sun, 14 Dec 2025 07:51:57 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1765698718; cv=none; b=lYTAyhgvDZurhcKwgD3ExuQMPF/+m5bsUtc89DdzxzIzQ0erpByE/eMabOkGRLdjAs5LXsvgk3rQm1qIfiNneoGyY2l6lXDqU9S9xaio7j2dOWt0mdzYCysg1ZheyS4Mkfn/r+QM1bNw0vml6lyhZ2yUj+U01c5ZVcS07nAtv3Q= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1765698718; c=relaxed/simple; bh=jc25aBVoCbHy2dgXNVoP8zUhYfLL/1ATHrNSh1fYS1g=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=J7cfj/QGzwd7JTNhTqAUokodNW/3W4lGk7VfuUiKNAhzKzLWMsOQTA4YP/h9j8LeXVetLr19Lc+27PsKyv4jt9myxl5Y55NcGt106cwXHlDhwQfLEhD1A5T13XyGdvwSeAPN+7c67PUjbhxEKyw2jw9jpORDJr1E70gOROsZTgg= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=pQQBZ1++; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="pQQBZ1++" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2E504C4CEF1; Sun, 14 Dec 2025 07:51:55 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1765698717; bh=jc25aBVoCbHy2dgXNVoP8zUhYfLL/1ATHrNSh1fYS1g=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=pQQBZ1++g516AWrTK4zhcm4aVxWfeAFdeDR5pd1j/moLcIxrIZYTTvSLTgrOpPnvr +e8gVO9ku08dn9tHcmj7crdDVU20M2GHwaGaYPbtC2uiQJrsPGPHFQzeWFJHdaFiUy UPofEb8Qm20gJ8mQSdmOOf8T1h4pdcHRBfHf6nQZf/82O7pm9wjffU0kWaO5snI0A6 YFPUozCDC7a5jjWGdBbsUQ7D1dFHKiQ7/GsOwcfbzeeCXXedNbAY2GbnwvnufY+0Le 03lUl6i/LUFoFZ9ochCpuifV+3xdc2hH+sErHHtYEmkDlaxIk/1SRvn5FKcwYrvQu6 n/2k07VdJRl1Q== Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2025 08:51:53 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar To: Borislav Petkov Cc: Linus Torvalds , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, the arch/x86 maintainers , Peter Zijlstra Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] x86 fixes Message-ID: References: <20251212143136.GAaTwnSOOUSU4VsZKY@renoirsky.local> <20251213234821.GAaT37RWQ2AS8guOiT@renoirsky.local> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20251213234821.GAaT37RWQ2AS8guOiT@renoirsky.local> * Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Sat, Dec 13, 2025 at 11:00:11AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > Yeah, but that's not really how we apply -stable tags. If it's good for > > -stable, it's good for Linus's tree, full stop. > > Full stop, schmulstop... I'm not going to send a not as much as possibly > tested fix to Linus for something which was a nasty pain to get right > a couple of times because of a bunch of SNAFUs by BIOS and Qemu and > whatnot, just to break other machines and then hurry and scramble to fix > it again. 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. > Rather, I'd let it cook for a whole cycle so that we're sure. If a fix is important enough to get a -stable tag, it should go upstream sooner rather than later. Thanks, Ingo