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 AF2887EEFD for ; Wed, 19 Jun 2024 09:25:41 +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=1718789141; cv=none; b=G6VDnMyE2yO5032WzCyR4TAuruiUxx9rJRIBjrqENxbznLhLfS2+oXczf+3UsUff9fWAYjA056CIGorqzxxqC1LL3gga6fXAW4t6JpSpXhJBxhX+ZNWuloS2UmnwZbb4rd1Pb6cW9m8Bg9F7WlHUD4d/CHxs/CyBZK3oXo9MCN8= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1718789141; c=relaxed/simple; bh=+Sbk6niFPtNnof44cUq0AcZjTzv5fkSvFURy098SRtc=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=Iwiwe7sZDLlQ0cUto7nTtHz0iZRDDMKNMjY3PkMv3gUoe9OilgnFMd5qabRHGRRx2L40NQUwD5e44d+4xXwzIVKlo+V81I4HpOVF1XtHlXsCcKFmqe6cP4xDa+pIcxxSW8rTe3/pBpUtlM3n9YsnUzZXb0M1vvKeB7nMYJuH6rk= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linuxfoundation.org header.i=@linuxfoundation.org header.b=JiBXPYzh; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linuxfoundation.org header.i=@linuxfoundation.org header.b="JiBXPYzh" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E1FD3C2BBFC; Wed, 19 Jun 2024 09:25:40 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=linuxfoundation.org; s=korg; t=1718789141; bh=+Sbk6niFPtNnof44cUq0AcZjTzv5fkSvFURy098SRtc=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=JiBXPYzhcfnsmyMAMXVu/85y9DegK1O+V72f3WYmJOFieTCrw8ro4JTsz2mwmaiU2 WzuurgAtfctbmd0fvBEH/6yfBiFRxU2dogYuktNBHdnug3cUAIjx6CpVYNk5ZP+XZH ALnL2nvTaEt6jkBj2xp56nCbmjVfKFe6OJs02cOo= Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2024 11:25:38 +0200 From: "gregkh@linuxfoundation.org" To: "Grumbach, Emmanuel" Cc: "stable@vger.kernel.org" , "Korenblit, Miriam Rachel" , "Berg, Johannes" Subject: Re: [PATCH 6.9 1/2] wifi: iwlwifi: mvm: support iwl_dev_tx_power_cmd_v8 Message-ID: <2024061955-unstuck-static-9f3c@gregkh> References: <20240618110924.24509-1-emmanuel.grumbach@intel.com> <2024061917-kinswoman-nylon-c35f@gregkh> <832c8e0030465c6356097eb04a98f922cd152ab0.camel@intel.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: stable@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <832c8e0030465c6356097eb04a98f922cd152ab0.camel@intel.com> On Wed, Jun 19, 2024 at 09:03:34AM +0000, Grumbach, Emmanuel wrote: > On Wed, 2024-06-19 at 10:51 +0200, Greg KH wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 18, 2024 at 02:09:23PM +0300, Emmanuel Grumbach wrote: > > > commit 8f892e225f416fcf2b55a0f9161162e08e2b0cc7 upstream. > > > > > > This just adds a __le32 that we (currently) don't use. > > > > Why is this needed for a stable tree if this is nothing that is actually > > used and then we need another fix for it after that? > > Right, so I totally understand you're confused... I should probably have re-written the commit > message to explain why this is needed for stable... > > This patch allows to handle a new version of a specific command to the firmware. As explained in the > commit message, we don't need the new field, but ... the command got bigger and we must align to the > new size of course. If we don't, the firmware will get a command that is shorter than expected and > will crash. > We originally didn't think we'd need that on the firmware versions supported by kernel 6.9 and this > is why we didn't queue this patch for 6.9. Now, it appears that the latest firmware version that 6.9 > supports does need the new version of the command. > Unfortunately, we learnt that the hard way, through bugzilla :-( > > Now, this patch introduced a regression that is fixed by another patch... > Would you prefer me to squash them? > > > > > I can't see how this commit actually does anything on it's own, what am > > I missing? > > > > What bug is this fixing?  A regression?  Is this a new feature? > > So, yes, it fixes a bug as explained above. > This is a regression because older kernels won't load the new firmware and won't hit the firmware > crash. > > > > > confused, > > I should have re-written the commit message. Sorry. > I hope things are now clearer.. Keeping the commit message the same is fine, and not squashing is also fine, but a huge hint as to _why_ this is relevent for the stable trees would have been appreciated. That's what [0/X] email blurbs are for :) thanks, I'll go queue these up now. greg k-h