Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S935763AbdGTJQS (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Thu, 20 Jul 2017 05:16:18 -0400
Received: from mail-wr0-f193.google.com ([209.85.128.193]:38155 "EHLO
        mail-wr0-f193.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S933179AbdGTIjP (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Thu, 20 Jul 2017 04:39:15 -0400
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2017 10:39:10 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: Daniel Kiper <daniel.kiper@oracle.com>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org,
        Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>,
        Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, andrew.cooper3@citrix.com,
        jgross@suse.com, linux-efi@vger.kernel.org, matt@codeblueprint.co.uk,
        xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4.12 26/84] x86/xen/efi: Initialize only the EFI struct
 members used by Xen
Message-ID: <20170720083910.aygobq7t7g7laszt@gmail.com>
References: <20170719092322.362625377@linuxfoundation.org>
 <20170719092323.396710042@linuxfoundation.org>
 <20170719103747.GZ4448@olila.local.net-space.pl>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20170719103747.GZ4448@olila.local.net-space.pl>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 556
Lines: 19


* Daniel Kiper <daniel.kiper@oracle.com> wrote:

> Hey Greg,
> 
> On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 11:43:32AM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > 4.12-stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
> 
> Why did you skip this patch for 4.11? IMO it should be applied there too.

The thing is, this patch should probaly not even be in v4.12, as it should only 
make any difference if there's a separate _bug_ in the kernel.

This patch makes things more robust going forward, but I question that it needs to 
be in -stable.

Thanks,

	Ingo