RE: [PATCH 1/2] amd_nb: Add PCI ID for family 19h model 78h

RE: [PATCH 1/2] amd_nb: Add PCI ID for family 19h model 78h

[Limonciello, Mario]

[AMD Official Use Only - General]

+stable, Sasha

> > Together with this patch there are now at least two regressions if
> > -rc1 whch could have been avoided and may impact testability on
> > affected systems.
>
> Are you saying that this patch which fixes s2idle on some random box
> should've gone to Linus *immediately*?
>
> And read my mail again:
>
> "Some fixes need longer testing because there have been cases where
> a fix breaks something else."
>
> So yes, I disagree with rushing fixes immediately. If they're obvious
> - whatever that means - then sure but not all of them are such.
>
> --

Unfortunately, it looks like the broken commit got backported into 6.1.28,
but the fix still isn't in Linus' tree.

Sasha,

Can you please pick up
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip.git/commit/?h=x86/urgent&id=23a5b8bb022c1e071ca91b1a9c10f0ad6a0966e9
for 6.1.29 to fix the regression?

Thanks,

Re: [PATCH 1/2] amd_nb: Add PCI ID for family 19h model 78h

[Thorsten Leemhuis]

On 11.05.23 21:51, Limonciello, Mario wrote:
> [AMD Official Use Only - General]
> 
> +stable, Sasha
> 
>>> Together with this patch there are now at least two regressions if
>>> -rc1 whch could have been avoided and may impact testability on
>>> affected systems.
>>
>> Are you saying that this patch which fixes s2idle on some random box
>> should've gone to Linus *immediately*?
>>
>> And read my mail again:
>>
>> "Some fixes need longer testing because there have been cases where
>> a fix breaks something else."
>>
>> So yes, I disagree with rushing fixes immediately. If they're obvious
>> - whatever that means - then sure but not all of them are such.
>>
>> --
> 
> Unfortunately, it looks like the broken commit got backported into 6.1.28,
> but the fix still isn't in Linus' tree.
> 
> Sasha,
> 
> Can you please pick up
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip.git/commit/?h=x86/urgent&id=23a5b8bb022c1e071ca91b1a9c10f0ad6a0966e9
> for 6.1.29 to fix the regression?

FWIW, the stable team afaics usually does not fix anything in stable
trees before it's fixed in mainline. IOW: that fix now quickly needs to
go to Linus to get it quickly fixed in 6.1.y.

Side note: I'll soon post a rewritten section of 'Prioritize work on
fixing regressions' which is part of
Documentation/process/handling-regressions.rst. It among others will
cover this case:

```
* Whenever you want to swiftly resolve a regression that recently also
made it into a proper mainline, stable, or longterm release, fix it
quickly in mainline; when appropriate thus involve Linus to fast-track
the fix. That's because the stable team normally does neither revert nor
fix any changes that cause a regression in mainline, too.
```

Ciao, Thorsten

Re: [PATCH 1/2] amd_nb: Add PCI ID for family 19h model 78h

[Sasha Levin]

On Thu, May 11, 2023 at 07:51:42PM +0000, Limonciello, Mario wrote:
>[AMD Official Use Only - General]
>
>+stable, Sasha
>
>> > Together with this patch there are now at least two regressions if
>> > -rc1 whch could have been avoided and may impact testability on
>> > affected systems.
>>
>> Are you saying that this patch which fixes s2idle on some random box
>> should've gone to Linus *immediately*?
>>
>> And read my mail again:
>>
>> "Some fixes need longer testing because there have been cases where
>> a fix breaks something else."
>>
>> So yes, I disagree with rushing fixes immediately. If they're obvious
>> - whatever that means - then sure but not all of them are such.
>>
>> --
>
>Unfortunately, it looks like the broken commit got backported into 6.1.28,
>but the fix still isn't in Linus' tree.
>
>Sasha,
>
>Can you please pick up
>https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip.git/commit/?h=x86/urgent&id=23a5b8bb022c1e071ca91b1a9c10f0ad6a0966e9
>for 6.1.29 to fix the regression?

Happily, once it lands upstream :)

-- 
Thanks,
Sasha

Re: [PATCH 1/2] amd_nb: Add PCI ID for family 19h model 78h

[Greg KH]

On Thu, May 11, 2023 at 07:51:42PM +0000, Limonciello, Mario wrote:
> [AMD Official Use Only - General]
> 
> +stable, Sasha
> 
> > > Together with this patch there are now at least two regressions if
> > > -rc1 whch could have been avoided and may impact testability on
> > > affected systems.
> >
> > Are you saying that this patch which fixes s2idle on some random box
> > should've gone to Linus *immediately*?
> >
> > And read my mail again:
> >
> > "Some fixes need longer testing because there have been cases where
> > a fix breaks something else."
> >
> > So yes, I disagree with rushing fixes immediately. If they're obvious
> > - whatever that means - then sure but not all of them are such.
> >
> > --
> 
> Unfortunately, it looks like the broken commit got backported into 6.1.28,
> but the fix still isn't in Linus' tree.
> 
> Sasha,
> 
> Can you please pick up
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip.git/commit/?h=x86/urgent&id=23a5b8bb022c1e071ca91b1a9c10f0ad6a0966e9
> for 6.1.29 to fix the regression?

Now that this is in Linus's tree, it's queued up, thanks.

greg k-h