From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
x86@kernel.org, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] x86/mm: Check if PTRS_PER_PMD is defined before use
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2025 10:37:50 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <d2a1dc6e-640f-45b2-972e-b168ceb577dc@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Z7y2W8tsAOPhqNfn@smile.fi.intel.com>
On 2/24/25 10:11, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>> From reading the "Closes:" link, it appears this is a new issue that
>> originates from a new compile flag. So it doesn't seem like it's worth
>> backporting.
> FWIW, I haven't put any Fixes tag nor Cc: stable@ 🙂
> Also note this looks like both compilers complain about the same.
Yeah, I did note that.
I see a lot of patches where folks simply forget about stable and Fixes.
Unfortunately, I'm not super clairvoyant and when I see an ambiguous
changelog without stable and Fixes, I can't tell if it was an oversight
or intentional.
It would be great if contributors could be less ambiguous and save us
the trouble of having to ask!
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-02-24 18:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-02-24 17:39 [PATCH v1 1/1] x86/mm: Check if PTRS_PER_PMD is defined before use Andy Shevchenko
2025-02-24 17:59 ` Dave Hansen
2025-02-24 18:11 ` Andy Shevchenko
2025-02-24 18:37 ` Dave Hansen [this message]
2025-02-24 20:36 ` Andy Shevchenko
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=d2a1dc6e-640f-45b2-972e-b168ceb577dc@intel.com \
--to=dave.hansen@intel.com \
--cc=andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lkp@intel.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox