From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <stable-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mail.linuxfoundation.org ([140.211.169.12]:48198 "EHLO
        mail.linuxfoundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1751391AbdBEOFt (ORCPT
        <rfc822;stable@vger.kernel.org>); Sun, 5 Feb 2017 09:05:49 -0500
Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2017 15:05:50 +0100
From: 'Greg KH' <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Steve Wise <swise@opengridcomputing.com>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] iw_cxgb4: set correct FetchBurstMax for QPs
Message-ID: <20170205140550.GA3173@kroah.com>
References: <02ba01d27e3f$8b7c3c20$a274b460$@opengridcomputing.com>
 <20170205102847.GA28076@kroah.com>
 <026a01d27fb5$97910f00$c6b32d00$@opengridcomputing.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <026a01d27fb5$97910f00$c6b32d00$@opengridcomputing.com>
Sender: stable-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <stable.vger.kernel.org>

On Sun, Feb 05, 2017 at 07:41:45AM -0600, Steve Wise wrote:
> > > commit b414fa01c31318383ae29d9d23cb9ca4184bbd86
> > > Author: Steve Wise <swise@opengridcomputing.com>
> > > Date:   Thu Dec 15 08:09:35 2016 -0800
> > >
> > >     iw_cxgb4: set correct FetchBurstMax for QPs
> > >
> > >     The current QP FetchBurstMax value is 256B, which
> > >     is incorrect since a WR can exceed that value.  The
> > >     result being a partial WR fetched by hardware, and
> > >     a fatal "bad WR" error posted by the SGE.
> > >
> > >     So bump the FetchBurstMax to 512B.
> > >
> > >     Signed-off-by: Steve Wise <swise@opengridcomputing.com>
> > >     Signed-off-by: Doug Ledford <dledford@redhat.com>
> > >
> > > I'm not sure if this is the correct way to request this, but I think I'm
> > > following _option_2 from Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt.
> > 
> > Now queued up.  Are you sure this isn't also needed in the 4.4-stable
> > tree?
> >
> 
> Hey Greg,  At first, I didn't think it is needed because, while the bug is
> indeed present in that code, it is only exposed (and causes problems) with
> the new T6 hardware.   But now I think I'd like the fix pulled in 4.4-stable
> to avoid any issues if T6 support is pulled into that base.

How would I pull "T6" support into that kernel?  I'm guessing that's a
much larger issue and isn't something that would normally happen in a
stable kernel release?

thanks,

greg k-h