Re: your mail

[Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>]

On Thu, Dec 13, 2018 at 03:09:15PM +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> this is a backport of commit 7aa54be297655 ("locking/qspinlock, x86:
> Provide liveness guarantee") for the v4.9 stable tree.
> For the v4.4 tree the ARCH_USE_QUEUED_SPINLOCKS option got disabled on
> x86.
> For v4.9 it has been decided to do a minimal backport of the final fix
> (including all its dependencies).
> With this backport I can't reproduce the issue in the latest v4.9-RT
> tree. I was able to boot (and use) an arm64 box with these patches so it
> is not broken in an abvious way.

As Peter said, a 4.14 backport would be simpler, but I would prefer to
wait for that before accepting these patches into 4.9.

I don't want people to move from 4.9 to 4.14 and hit a regression right
away.  So if we could get a 4.14 backport first, that would be wonderful
and then allow me to take the 4.9 patches.

Seeing patches in 4.9 and 4.19 but not in 4.14 does not make me feel
good :)

And given the horrible header mistakes on this series, I'm going to drop
them to prevent anyone else from having to hand-edit them in order to
get things cleaned up.  Please resend this series after you have done
that.

thanks,

greg k-h